Take a look at Wallstreetwinnersonline.com

RickJ

Yeah, I noticed that.

The point is that Bush is incapable of admitting a mistake and Rumsfeld is borderline psychotic.

After the failure to find WMD or a collaboration with Al-Queda, the justification became “spreading democracy in the Middle East.”

Possibly because that’s not what I think? If I wanted you to “fuck off” and never post here again I would have come straight out and said so – if you note I tend not to pull punches and say what I mean to say (and, like the sarcasm below, it’s so strong there is no “coy” about it). But if it makes you feel better, then go ahead and believe what you need too. I am an Evil(tm) conservative and we are all out to get you and you are the nicest person there is on the planet. Personally I prefer you to post, I prefer to have people who say pretty much the anti-war line in a forum where it can be easily disputed instead of places where there is no dissenting voice (such as nearly all leftist and anti-war blogs).

And you still quote secret polls and old ones that contradict current ones. At least the Brooking institute stuff (after searching) has a few newer, but the majority of it cites the exact same polls as have been gone over here (and doesn’t bother to mention that they are secret and unverifiable). The newest polls leave out that they are Baghdad only but are represented as Iraq as a whole (I’m sure that was simply an oversight – not intentional) – in a handfull of plces it says “Urban only”. Again – something you you would not accept from a right-wing think tank but expect everyone to take for gospel from a left-wing think tank. You are citing the same polls over and over through different institutions and do not even seem to realise it.

Of course, as I said, I knew this would be the case. At some point there is little reason to go over things again. The information has been given and, at this point, even those who are “undecided” have all the information needed and I can only give the same stuff over again.

“… 47% of Iraqis polled said their country was headed in the right direction, as opposed to 37% who said they thought that it was going in the wrong direction. And 56% thought things would be better in six months. Only 16% thought they would be worse.”

“… 64% of military officers are confident that we will succeed in establishing a stable democracy in Iraq. The comparable figures for journalists and academics are 33% and 27%, respectively.”

“Although both the Army and the Marine Corps are having trouble attracting fresh recruits – no surprise, given the state of public opinion regarding Iraq – reenlistment rates continue to exceed expectations.”

“… the Brookings Institution reports that per capita income has doubled since 2003 and is now 30% higher than it was before the war. Thanks primarily to the increase in oil prices, the Iraqi economy is projected to grow at a whopping 16.8% next year.”

From yesterday at Informed Comment

Murtha pointed out that a recent poll indicated that 80% of Iraqis want the U.S. out. This poll, a secret British defense ministry survey conducted in August 2005, is consistent with earlier polls and several facts: the fact that most slates in the January 2005 election — including the United Iraqi Alliance (UIA), which won the election — had in their platform the demand for a timetable for the withdrawal of occupation forces from Iraq; a U.S. military poll in February that found only 23% of urban residents supported the presence of coalition troops, compared to 71% opposed; the statement of 126 members of the Iraqi National Assembly, including a majority of the 140 MPs of the majority UIA, demanding “the departure of the occupation force”; and the request made repeatedly by the National Sovereignty Committee of the Iraq National Assembly for a withdrawal timetable for “occupation troops.”

“But I’m also very suspicious of the discussed polls because they contradict the environment rendered by the dispatches from Michael Yon & most of the military blogs I’ve come across.”

You will note that the linked article is from 4/29/04 – over a year ago. The poll in question was taken at the time of the Falluja uprising, massive rolling blackouts, a time when Iraqi’s didn’t believe we would allow them to vote. In short not anything like Iraq of today. And – as even the article states – it was the lowest point in the whole thing for the US. Even with all the doom and gloom 61% said it was all worth it.

You will note current polls VERY much contradict these numbers – the shift happened once they figured out that we were going to let them vote, and did let them vote. I highly highly suspect that if the question “Do you think the US will allow you to vote and be a sovereign nation” was asked in this poll a VERY high percentage would have said “no” – what we have done since then has had a HUGE change. I also highly suspect that not only would there be a high correlation but a high causation between not thinking that we will allow them to govern themselfs and the attitude for us to leave right then.

You will also note that the military bloggers have changed since then. During the time of the poll the talk was of winning minds, killing the bad guys, bringing order and infrastructure (such as electricity). No where was the current optimism present (other than they felt it was an achievable goal).

If someone is using polling numbers that old there is going to be a reason. Maybe Anonymous didn’t notice, maybe it fit with his/her idealism and didn’t care, maybe there is something else. In any event you can’t use a poll that old for anything on public attitude – especially not in someplace as rapidly changing as Iraq. That anonymous cites it as “proof” is a hit against them – if the stuff they show as strong proof that they base thier beliefes on is that non-current it’s hard to take the rest of thier conclusions as very much – garbage in garbage out.

I’m sure if Anonymous thought for a moment about what they read they could have figured out that a poll over a year and a half old taken during shellings and blackouts isn’t viable now. If not, then there is little reason to discuss anything with them – simply point out the idiocy and let them bury themselfs.

I’ve been behind the war from the beginning because I believed America would be safer with Saddam’s removal. That has been done, although I don’t think Saddam’s continued neutralization by imprisonment or execution is guaranteed if the US pulls out of Iraq before the trial ends. We’ve accomplished the main goal by Saddam’s removal but once the US is gone anything could happen, including Saddam ending up back in power again. The “pullout now” folks in Congress need to realize that.

Once you have defeated & destroyed an enemy government I believe you must make every possible effort to get the defeated country back on its feet, which means at least able to defend & police itself.

I’m troubled by the polls that have been discussed. From the beginning of the war I expected a third of Iraq to be anti-coalition. During the American Revolutionary War, a 3rd of the population was pro-British, a third pro-revolution & a third didn’t care one way or another. However, if an overwhelming amount of the Iraqis want the coalition out, it may soon be time to begin to leave.

It’s not that I think the opinion of the Iraqi population necessarily must dictate US policy decisions, I really don’t care too much what the Iraqi population thinks in the same way that I wouldn’t have cared much about German opinion during the occupation after WW2. US security came first then & it comes first now but I think it becomes difficult to hold things together militarily if a great number of the population is extremely hostile. That number might be even greater than 57% & from maybe 2 or 3 polls I trust.

If chaos followed a coalition pullout & Iraq fell into civil war maybe we could send Gallup in there to see if the Iraqis still wanted us gone:-) Seriously, if a government belligerent to the West ended up in control the coalition might be forced to go back in to bring down yet another belligerent Iraqi leader.

A West-friendly non-terrorist-harboring democratic government in Iraq & Afghanistan would be great but the US & the coalition may have to settle for the first 2 conditions.

However, a non-belligerent relationship where there is absolutely no harboring or sponsorship of terrorism are mandatory conditions. If a hostile, terror-sponsoring government(read jihadist or hostile Ba’athist) were to come into power I would be in favor of another war.

But I’m also very suspicious of the discussed polls because they contradict the environment rendered by the dispatches from Michael Yon & most of the military blogs I’ve come across. Those sources give the reader the sense that although there has been steady improvement in Iraqi military & police capability & US military/Iraqi civilian interaction that for now the military & police still need coalition forces around. I would be very interested to know what Michael Yon thought of these polls. At any rate I would have to know much more about the polls than mere quotes from them. Maybe more will be known by the time I get back in a blogging mode. In science experimental findings must be independently verified & duplicated before they are generally accepted. That may also be a good rule for polls & surveys.

May the discussion continue.