Poll: Iran Greatest Threat
A new Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll reveals that Americans believe Iran is the most dangerous threat to American security, knocking North Korea out of the top spot.
Americans think Iran is the country that poses the greatest immediate danger to the United States today, taking over the number one spot from North Korea. A FOX News poll released Thursday shows the public is concerned about Iran attacking the United States with nuclear weapons, and even more concerned about Iran supplying nukes to terrorists.
If Iran were to obtain nuclear weapons, an overwhelming 91 percent of Americans say they are concerned it would sell them to terrorists, including 68 percent that say they are very concerned. In addition, eight in 10 Americans are concerned Iran would use nukes to attack a neighboring country (54 percent very concerned), and 73 percent are concerned it would attack the United States (47 percent very concerned).
Iran tops the list when respondents are asked to say which country — without being read a list — poses the greatest immediate danger to the United States. Today a 28 percent plurality says Iran, up from 18 percent a year ago. North Korea, which was first on last year’s list, comes in second this time around at 17 percent, down from 26 percent (January 2005). Iraq (16 percent) and China (14 percent) are other common mentions.
While I happen to think these results reasonably accurate, foreign policy is a topic for which public opinion polling is spectacularly unhelpful. Frankly, few Americans have the slightest bit of expertise in this field. Most could not point out North Korea and Iran on a map, much less analyze the comparative threats of their nuclear programs.
This poll, then, is mostly a proxy for the framing ability of the media. Iran has been in the news a lot recently. North Korea has not. Ergo, Iran must be more dangerous.
Agreed. More placebo than anathema, polls are specious for most topics beyond the watercooler. The caveat, in this case, to those theories being that agenda setting and media framing are limited in that they can help tell an audience what to think about, but not what to think.
Relatedly, check out this LA Times article:
This is why they elect candidates who think that continents are countries, who are easily tricked by foreign exiles who are convicted frauds into equating self-interested lies with analysis, and who doesnt know the name of the leader of a nuclear state with a majority muslim population.
Poll me this Batman;what has two pointy ears, a tail, and brays while it’s heart bleeds all over?Answer;a liberal democrat the greatest threat to our country.P.S. i think Iran and N.Korea are bad to.
While I’m sure that’s the true explanation, I think it may be correct – tho for other reasons. My (admittedly amateur) understanding of the situation is that Iran, even though farther from having no-kidding nuclear weapons than North Korea, is more likely to actually _use_ them than NK… Either offensively (an open attack on Israel or US troops in Iraq) or defensively (as a response to a US or Israeli strike on Iranian nuke development sites). NK, although run by an arguably bigger nutcase, seems less openly belligerent (today, at least).
legion: I don’t disagree on any of those points. Indeed, I open my analysis with “While I happen to think these results reasonably accurate….”
My point is that the public is right by accident. That’s not to insult them, merely to state a truism of public understanding of most issues of foreign policy. Hell, I’m at least putatively an expert international relations and have only a general understanding of the two nations involved, let alone the technical parameters of their nuclear programs and the internal decision-making processes of their leadership.