THE TIMES POLL : Most Wary but Will Support a Ground War

As military preparations intensify in the Middle East, Americans remain reluctant to immediately begin a potentially bloody ground war against Iraq but indicate they will rally behind President Bush if he decides to launch such an attack, a new Los Angeles Times Poll shows.

On the eve of what may be the decisive confrontation in the Gulf crisis, the poll finds America in a hesitantly hawkish mood, with a substantial majority rejecting any negotiations until Iraq has unconditionally withdrawn from Kuwait but simultaneously preferring to rely as long as possible on air attacks before subjecting U. S. troops to the unpredictable risks of a ground assault.

Neither the reports of civilian casualties in Baghdad, nor the flurry of diplomatic maneuvers by Iraq and the Soviet Union, have dented the public support for the war, the poll found. After one month of fighting, the public remains overwhelmingly committed: 81% of those surveyed said they backed the decision to fight, virtually unchanged from the war’s first week, and 63% strongly support the war.

At the same time, 84% of those polled approve of Bush’s handling of the crisis--down only minimally from the stratospheric 88% approval the President received in the war’s euphoric first days. And despite deepening fears about the economy, 82% approved of Bush’s overall performance as President--among the highest figures ever recorded for any President.

That public confidence represents, perhaps, the key political asset for Bush as he confronts America’s jagged apprehensions about moving from a virtually unchallenged air war, which some have likened to a video game, into a ground conflict, which many fear could instead call to mind gruesome images of Verdun.

“I don’t think it’s yet time for a ground war,” said Dr. George Teter, a Carbon, Ind., physician who was polled by The Times. “But the President has all the information, much more than I do, and I would go along with him. I don’t think he’s a warmonger, and I believe he would do it only if he decided it had to be done.”

At a moment of unusual consensus, the poll suggests one political risk facing Bush: not that initial public commitment may prove too thin to support a ground offensive, but that anything less than total victory may fail to satisfy the strong public emotions the war has stirred.

Though Bush has insisted that U.S. goals extend no further than the liberation of Kuwait, more than four-fifths of those surveyed said they would not consider the war a success unless Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is removed from power. More than three-fifths said the war would not be successful unless Iraq is driven from Kuwait, Hussein is driven from power and the Iraqi leader is tried as a war criminal.

“If he’s not gotten rid of now, the same problem will be back in a few more years,” said Timothy Marcum, a poll respondent who runs a trucking business in Logan, W. Va.

The poll, supervised by Times Polling Director John Brennan, surveyed 1,822 Americans nationwide by telephone from Feb. 15 through Feb. 17; it has a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. On specific demographic groups, the margin is somewhat larger.

On the key question of whether to launch a ground war, Americans appear torn between their desire to hold down casualties and their solidifying conclusion that only a land assault will force Hussein from Kuwait.

Asked what the United States should do next, the least popular option was launching a ground attack as “soon as possible,” with just 7% backing that course. Nearly half of those polled preferred to begin ground operations only “if the air war fails to get results in a reasonable amount of time,” while 30% said the United States should rely on the air attacks for “as long as necessary” and not send in ground troops at all. Only 12% said the United States should stop the air war “and attempt to open negotiations.”

That hesitance about sending the troops forward against Iraq’s entrenched fortifications reflects the enormous priority that respondents put on minimizing the loss of American lives. By a margin of 74% to 19%, those surveyed agreed the United States should try to hold down casualties, even if that means prolonging the war.

“I’d like to delay as long as possible,” said Gloria Ireton, a retired counselor in Garden Grove who responded to the poll. “Even if we save just one life . . . what’s the hurry?”

But other results suggest that, if a ground war begins, the public will coalesce behind Bush despite their ambivalence--just as they did when hostilities erupted in January, despite the substantial support at that point for giving economic sanctions more time to work.

Though Americans might prefer to hold off, nine in 10 believe a ground war is likely. By 58% to 28%, those polled said that a ground war will be required “to achieve U.S. objectives” in the conflict. And by a decisive margin of 78% to 19%, respondents said they would support Bush if he decides to begin a ground war.

“That has to be decided by the people we put our trust in,” said Sean Conboy, an equipment operator in New Milford, N.J. “When they come to the point where they consider a ground war inevitable, so be it.”

The poll found that conviction shared by virtually all demographic groups: 69% of women and 87% of men said they would support Bush if he orders a ground war, as did large majorities of whites and Latinos. Support was uniformly high among all age groups. Only blacks were split, with 41% saying they would back a Bush decision to invade and 49% saying they would oppose it.

Families with relatives fighting in the Gulf are as willing as the rest of the population to support Bush if he sends the troops over the border. Though mounting casualties have historically eroded popular support during wartime, for now even those anticipating significant losses are generally willing to back the President if he makes the decision to invade.

Overall, Americans still anticipate relatively restrained losses in the war: 40% of those polled expect 1,000 or fewer American soldiers to be killed, while 25% expect losses in the range of 2,500 to 5,000. Just 13% expect 10,000 or more soldiers to be killed.

This willingness to accept a potentially lethal ground offensive may derive in part from a pervasive skepticism about negotiations with Hussein. Just one-third of those polled said Bush should be doing more to find a negotiated settlement to the conflict. And by a margin of 82% to 16%, those surveyed said they did not believe the United States could negotiate with Hussein.

“The President has succeeded in portraying Saddam Hussein as a villain,” said Brennan, the Times poll director. “That makes it easier to carry out the war against him but harder to get the public to accept negotiations with him, if the time comes.”

Iraq’s offer to leave Kuwait if a long list of conditions were met--including the withdrawal of allied forces from the region, and Israeli withdrawal from the occupied territories--found a skeptical audience. Just 6% of those surveyed consider it a serious offer, while 50% dismissed it as propaganda and 40% called it an attempt to buy time; 90% agreed with Bush’s decision to dismiss it. And three-fifths of those surveyed said they doubted that Monday’s meeting between Iraqi Foreign Minister Tarik Aziz and Soviet President Mikhail S. Gorbachev would help produce a peaceful solution.

Americans appear willing to eventually accept talks with Iraq--but only if it first withdraws from Kuwait. Just 8% say the United States should not negotiate with Iraq at all, while 63% say talks could begin if Iraq unconditionally withdraws from Kuwait.

Whatever their feeling about the wisdom of negotiations, few Americans are expecting them: by nearly 4 to 1, those polled say it is unlikely that Hussein will give up the fight.

Widely publicized reports of civilian casualties in Baghdad and other Iraqi cities have stirred some anxieties, but most Americans seem to view them as an unavoidable consequence of war, the poll found. Though Americans by a margin of almost 2 to 1 believe the Iraqi people are “innocent of any blame for Hussein’s policies,” those polled agreed by 52% to 37% that the U.S. gains in the war have “been worth” the loss of civilian life suffered so far.

By a margin of 15 to 1, those polled believe the United States has done all it can to minimize civilian casualties in the war; just 3% believed Iraq’s claim that a shelter bombed last week in Baghdad was only a civilian facility. Nearly one-fourth of those surveyed thought the shelter was a military installation, while three-fifths said it probably combined civilian and military uses.

In any case, 71% of those polled say the United States is justified attacking military targets that Hussein has deployed to civilian areas, while only 22% disagree.

Scenes of domestic protest are tugging Americans between their support for the principle of free speech and their intense, often visceral, concern about the morale of the troops in the field. By a commanding majority of 70% to 27%, those surveyed agreed it was possible to protest the war and “still be a patriotic American.”

But nearly as great a majority--62% to 34%--said it was inappropriate to protest now that U.S. forces are in combat. Even half of those who felt that protest was not unpatriotic consider it inappropriate now that fighting has begun.

Driving the disapproval of public protest is the sense that speaking out against the war “hurts our troops.” Seven in 10 of those polled share that sentiment; even 45% of Americans opposing the war feel that protest hurts the troops.

Not surprisingly, given the overall support for the war and skepticism about protest, few of the dissenters’ arguments yet have much resonance for the general public. Presented with a list of seven arguments against the war, those polled gave significant credence only to the contention that “it’s not worth risking American lives for oil,” with 43% finding that a compelling argument.

Only about one-fourth of those polled found much value in the arguments that negotiations could solve the conflict, that the U.S. risked long-lasting Arab enmity by prosecuting the war and that vital U.S. interests are not at stake. In fact, by contrast, a plurality of those polled expect the war to increase stability in the Middle East, while two-thirds believe it will strengthen America’s overall position in the world.

Just 18% of those polled found much merit in the argument that “too many poor people and minorities” are fighting the war--though, strikingly, 58% of blacks found that a good reason for opposing the war. On the other hand, that case found little support among Latinos.

In a separate question, those polled dismissed by a margin of 58% to 37% the proposition that Bush was concentrating too much on the war and slighting problems at home.

VIEWS ON A GROUND WAR AND NEGOTIATIONS

In general, which is the better course for the United States to take in pursuing the war against Iraq?

* Get the war over as quickly as possible,even if that means risking higher U.S. casualties: 19%

* Try to keep U.S. casualties as low as possible, even if that means risking a longer war: 74%

Which of the following statements best describes the course of action you think would be the most effective in getting Iraq out of Kuwait:

* Launch a ground attack as soon as possible 7%

* Launch a ground attack only if air war fails to get results in a reasonable amount of time 47%

* Don’t use troops for ground attack but continue air war as long as necessary 30%

* Stop air war as soon as possible and attempt to open negotiations 12%

Suppose President Bush decides to order U.S. troops into a ground attack against Iraqi forces. Do you think you will support or oppose that decision?

* Support strongly 53%

* Support somewhat 25%

* Oppose somewhat 9%

* Oppose strongly 10%

Do you think a ground war against Iraq’s troops is necessary or not necessary to achieve U.S. objectives in the Middle East?

* Necessary 58%

* Not necessary 28%

* Not sure 14%

Do you think Saddam Hussein can be negotiated with or not?

* Yes 16%

* No 82%

Which of these statements comes closest to your opinion about U.S. policy toward negotiations with the Iraqis:

* Don’t negotiate at all 8%

* Negotiate only if Iraq withdraws from Kuwait with no conditions 63%

* Negotiate only if Iraq withdraws from Kuwait and be willing to consider some Iraqi conditions 21%

* Negotiate before Iraq withdraws from Kuwait 7%

Note: Some percentages may not add to 100% because of “don’t know” responses or rounding.

WIDE SUPPORT FOR THE WAR

Support for the war is widespread, even among those who expect a large number of American deaths and among those who expect the war to last more than six months. For example, 60% of those who expect 10,000 or more deaths support the war.

% who would % who support support ground attack the war overall if ordered by Bush Among All Americans 81% 78% * Among those who expect U.S. deaths of . . .

JUDGING THE ARGUMENTS PRO AND CON

Supporters and opponents were asked to rate various arguments for and against the war. PERCENTAGE WHO THINK THE FOLLOWING ARE GOOD ARGUMENTS FOR THE WAR:

All War War Americans Supporters Opponents *Force Hussein out of Kuwait 86% 94% 45% *Stop Hussein from dominating the Mideast 86% 95% 48% *Protect Saudi Arabia 74% 81% 36% *Resist forces of aggression everywhere 72% 80% 33% *Defend forces of freedom around world 70% 76% 42% *Restore the deposed Kuwaiti government 67% 75% 28% *Protect our oil supplies 49% 55% 21%

PERCENTAGE WHO THINK THE FOLLOWING ARE GOOD ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE WAR:

All War War Americans Supporters Opponents Not worth risking American lives for oil 43% 36% 71% *Too many problems at home 38% 31% 67% *Allies aren’t helping enough 35% 33% 50% *Negotiations could solve conflict 27% 20% 62% *Vital U.S. interests not threatened 26% 20% 54% *Arabs will hate the U.S. for years 24% 20% 40% *Too many American poor and minorities are fighting 18% 13% 39%