Full Version: The Iraqis want us Gone
Most Iraqis Favor Immediate U.S. Pullout, Polls Show
Leaders' Views Out of Step With Public
The polls seem pretty clear. Up to seventy percent, in many cases, of Iraqis want us to leave.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his government may want us to stay as long as they deem necessary, but it does not seem to be a view held by the people he is supposed to represent.
Here in America Bush believed he had a clear mandate, a view also held by his supporters, at 51%. At almost 70% of Iraqis wanting us to leave it seems a pretty clear indicator by our President’s own standards. The lowest rating was in the Kurdish area at 6 %, but then it jumps to 56% and tops out at 80% in the Tikrit area. Baghdad comes in at 65%.
Considering the clear numbers that they want us to leave, or at the least begin withdrawing, should we not begin to do so? The Iraqi government or some of its officials may wish us to stay but they seem very out of touch with the people they claim to represent. The clear danger of this to me seems to be that credence begins to build for the claims of America being an occupation force.
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Leaders' Views Out of Step With Public
QUOTE
BAGHDAD, Sept. 26 -- A strong majority of Iraqis want U.S.-led military forces to immediately withdraw from the country, saying their swift departure would make Iraq more secure and decrease sectarian violence, according to new polls by the State Department and independent researchers.
The polls seem pretty clear. Up to seventy percent, in many cases, of Iraqis want us to leave.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki and his government may want us to stay as long as they deem necessary, but it does not seem to be a view held by the people he is supposed to represent.
Here in America Bush believed he had a clear mandate, a view also held by his supporters, at 51%. At almost 70% of Iraqis wanting us to leave it seems a pretty clear indicator by our President’s own standards. The lowest rating was in the Kurdish area at 6 %, but then it jumps to 56% and tops out at 80% in the Tikrit area. Baghdad comes in at 65%.
Considering the clear numbers that they want us to leave, or at the least begin withdrawing, should we not begin to do so? The Iraqi government or some of its officials may wish us to stay but they seem very out of touch with the people they claim to represent. The clear danger of this to me seems to be that credence begins to build for the claims of America being an occupation force.
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
No. The United States, or any government for that matter, conducts its business with the governments of other countries, not directly with their people.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
See above.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Absolutely. Again, see above. The wishes of the people don't even come directly into play.
There are very good reasons that we only conduct governmental business with other governments. First, it is really the only feasible way to do so. Suppose we were in the process of negotiating a trade treaty, and the majority of the people in the other country wanted that treaty to go through. Does that make it so? No. Who would enact that treaty? The other government, of course. There just isn't any feasible way to conduct policy except through the respective governments.
Also, there may frequently be times (and this could easily be one of them) when the government might have more knowledge and foresight on an issue, and be acting in the best interests in the people in not wanting to do something, even though the people say they are in favor of it. For example, the Iraqi people themselves probably have no direct knowledge at all of the ability of Iraqi security forces to maintain security if we left. Therefore, if we were to honor their current wishes and leave, they might find the situation was suddenly worse, and if you asked them then, they might say they wanted us to come back. The government might be aware of this fact, and that would explain the discrepancy between its position and those expressed in the polls.
No. The United States, or any government for that matter, conducts its business with the governments of other countries, not directly with their people.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
See above.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Absolutely. Again, see above. The wishes of the people don't even come directly into play.
There are very good reasons that we only conduct governmental business with other governments. First, it is really the only feasible way to do so. Suppose we were in the process of negotiating a trade treaty, and the majority of the people in the other country wanted that treaty to go through. Does that make it so? No. Who would enact that treaty? The other government, of course. There just isn't any feasible way to conduct policy except through the respective governments.
Also, there may frequently be times (and this could easily be one of them) when the government might have more knowledge and foresight on an issue, and be acting in the best interests in the people in not wanting to do something, even though the people say they are in favor of it. For example, the Iraqi people themselves probably have no direct knowledge at all of the ability of Iraqi security forces to maintain security if we left. Therefore, if we were to honor their current wishes and leave, they might find the situation was suddenly worse, and if you asked them then, they might say they wanted us to come back. The government might be aware of this fact, and that would explain the discrepancy between its position and those expressed in the polls.
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
I would agree with Hobbes that institutional leaders deal with institutional leaders. A public opinion poll is not a formal body that one develops policy with. In the past we had government to government arrangements with Saddam Hussein as the standing government of Iraq without being particularly interested in how popular his policies were. Presumably also this government enjoys at least some legitimacy as having been elected. How democratic it is I'm still not quite clear.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
Normally I would say the government. However as it drifts into being a government by name only and the local sectarian militias appear to exercise the real power then the question of public opinion would seem to naturally play a bigger role. As of now we are, from a practical standpoint, the only thing resembling a broad governmental authority.
In addition over and over we hear stories of how Iraqi gov. forces operate in a sectarian fashion based on their particular ethnicity. And the corruption in the government seems to run rampant from top to bottom according to former Iraqi head of state Allawi. That includes weapons and money and other resources syphoned off to the insurgents as has been in the news recently. Like in Vietnam we are funding both sides. Think about that.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Ultimately any nation worth its salt is going to act in its own self-interest. It is fair to ask whether those interest are legitimate in a broader sense as we do share this planet with others. Our interest is to get out of while creating the least negative down stream effects as possible. No resolution of the problem is going to occur without all the major adjacent countries getting involved and a serious consideration of Iraqi internal politics. Our continuing refusal to work with Iran and Syria would seem to thwart any kind of resolution of the matter.
One other thing that seems to contribute to resistance to the occupation is the opinion, also expressed in the poll, that 77% of the Iraqis believe that we are determined to maintain permanent bases in that country. It's not clear that the BA has done anything to dissuade them of that belief.
Polls give one general guidelines as to what kind of effect your policies are having and as such are instructive. My view is regardless of the polls we should set a time table and get out and in the mean time do everything we can to get the UN and the affected parties involved in a peaceful transition. No one needs an unstable government next door. According to military figures the insurgents have maintained forces of 15 to 20 thousand since the early stages of the occupation, despite the elections and our killing them(How many of the deaths are part of the Zarqawi crowd I'm really not clear on) and the growth of the Iraqi gov. forces. Doesn't sound like progress to me. Given the sectarian explosion it appears more like regress.
Time to change policies and work our way out of there - intelligently of course.
I would agree with Hobbes that institutional leaders deal with institutional leaders. A public opinion poll is not a formal body that one develops policy with. In the past we had government to government arrangements with Saddam Hussein as the standing government of Iraq without being particularly interested in how popular his policies were. Presumably also this government enjoys at least some legitimacy as having been elected. How democratic it is I'm still not quite clear.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
Normally I would say the government. However as it drifts into being a government by name only and the local sectarian militias appear to exercise the real power then the question of public opinion would seem to naturally play a bigger role. As of now we are, from a practical standpoint, the only thing resembling a broad governmental authority.
In addition over and over we hear stories of how Iraqi gov. forces operate in a sectarian fashion based on their particular ethnicity. And the corruption in the government seems to run rampant from top to bottom according to former Iraqi head of state Allawi. That includes weapons and money and other resources syphoned off to the insurgents as has been in the news recently. Like in Vietnam we are funding both sides. Think about that.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Ultimately any nation worth its salt is going to act in its own self-interest. It is fair to ask whether those interest are legitimate in a broader sense as we do share this planet with others. Our interest is to get out of while creating the least negative down stream effects as possible. No resolution of the problem is going to occur without all the major adjacent countries getting involved and a serious consideration of Iraqi internal politics. Our continuing refusal to work with Iran and Syria would seem to thwart any kind of resolution of the matter.
One other thing that seems to contribute to resistance to the occupation is the opinion, also expressed in the poll, that 77% of the Iraqis believe that we are determined to maintain permanent bases in that country. It's not clear that the BA has done anything to dissuade them of that belief.
Polls give one general guidelines as to what kind of effect your policies are having and as such are instructive. My view is regardless of the polls we should set a time table and get out and in the mean time do everything we can to get the UN and the affected parties involved in a peaceful transition. No one needs an unstable government next door. According to military figures the insurgents have maintained forces of 15 to 20 thousand since the early stages of the occupation, despite the elections and our killing them(How many of the deaths are part of the Zarqawi crowd I'm really not clear on) and the growth of the Iraqi gov. forces. Doesn't sound like progress to me. Given the sectarian explosion it appears more like regress.
Time to change policies and work our way out of there - intelligently of course.
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
Yes, we care so much for democracy, well in that majority view typically wins I would say. I would also say who understands the situation more, bush at his ranch or the Iraqi people in Iraq.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
The people. The government will not last if they don’t care for the voice of the people, that’s not a democracy in any form, we also need to see that this is not some small scale civil issue, its more or less a civil war type of issue, I think for the most part the common Iraqi just wants some peace in there lives. The U.S I don’t think over the years has won there opinion it will come at our hands, and actually probably just make it worse, again not the fault of our military, we sent them to something that cant be a war but is, with ill planning all around which has only allowed the sitution fester into a horror story that will live on I am sure far after we leave in any form.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
The situation in Iraq came about because of us. Its the reason there is an insurgency fighting our occupation of there land and why nothing really has gone our way, because we don’t really have anything close to popular support at large over there. Mainly this has probably come on from bad planning, this is why we have generals that are angry and politicians within our own government. The culture is the focal point in any winning strategy in this type of conflict, its not genius to see this, simply put though we really would need nothing short of genius to turn it around. The longer we stay, the more repeats of yesterday we will see, pot marked with highs in terms of casualties.
Yes, we care so much for democracy, well in that majority view typically wins I would say. I would also say who understands the situation more, bush at his ranch or the Iraqi people in Iraq.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
The people. The government will not last if they don’t care for the voice of the people, that’s not a democracy in any form, we also need to see that this is not some small scale civil issue, its more or less a civil war type of issue, I think for the most part the common Iraqi just wants some peace in there lives. The U.S I don’t think over the years has won there opinion it will come at our hands, and actually probably just make it worse, again not the fault of our military, we sent them to something that cant be a war but is, with ill planning all around which has only allowed the sitution fester into a horror story that will live on I am sure far after we leave in any form.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
The situation in Iraq came about because of us. Its the reason there is an insurgency fighting our occupation of there land and why nothing really has gone our way, because we don’t really have anything close to popular support at large over there. Mainly this has probably come on from bad planning, this is why we have generals that are angry and politicians within our own government. The culture is the focal point in any winning strategy in this type of conflict, its not genius to see this, simply put though we really would need nothing short of genius to turn it around. The longer we stay, the more repeats of yesterday we will see, pot marked with highs in terms of casualties.
QUOTE(gordo @ Nov 1 2006, 07:34 PM) 
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
Yes, we care so much for democracy, well in that majority view typically wins I would say. I would also say who understands the situation more, bush at his ranch or the Iraqi people in Iraq.
The question doesn't even involve Bush, but the Iraqi government. There is a very valid possibility that yes, indeed they do understand the situation better than the people. How many of the people do you think really know what the current state of Iraqi security forces is, for example? Outside of those in the government, none of them. Keep in mind that it is quite easy to have an opinion. Everyone can have one (or several, even!) There is nothing in the polling process here to determine whether or not that is an informed opinion.
QUOTE
The people. The government will not last if they don’t care for the voice of the people, that’s not a democracy in any form, we also need to see that this is not some small scale civil issue, its more or less a civil war type of issue
Again, this is a problem for the Iraqi government, not for us. Unless you are advocating that we should enforce the will of their people (based on the latest poll only, mind you, which could surely be manipulated to provide just about any result desired) on foreign governments as a matter of foreign policy? Care to envision how many new wars that would get us into? I'm quite sure we could get a poll in China indicating that the majority there wish for democracy. Is that sufficient reason to then start WWIII? Or should we just abondon communicating with foreign governments completely, and just set about polling their people on all matters of foreign policy? After all, why bother with the governments if we're just going to disregard their stated policies anyway?
Keep in mind, one's opinion on the situation in Iraq really has nothing whatsoever to do with the answer to the debate questions. The question here is, quite simply, whether we should treat foreign governments as sovereign entities, or if we should deal directly with the people and whatever the latest opinion poll says to form long-lasting and perhaps irrevocable policy. Doing so would disenfranchise all foreign governments. There is a word for that.. it is anarchy. Don't confuse that with democracy, which is quite the opposite.
QUOTE
The question doesn't even involve Bush, but the Iraqi government.
Sorry, what would give the Iraqi government some proof they are for Iraq, maybe by caring about what the people think. Also, maybe when you see pics of Iraqis clearing out the dead from the latest round of sectarian violence you can watch the locals pick on the single Iraqi army soldier that could not stop it.
QUOTE
Again, this is a problem for the Iraqi government, not for us.
Sorry, could you explain to me how these items are independent of each other.
QUOTE
Or should we just abondon communicating with foreign governments completely, and just set about polling their people on all matters of foreign policy? After all, why bother with the government if we're just going to disregard it's wishes anyway?
Hey, I don’t think this is the first time we have been asked to leave, I think the government of Iraq even asked us to. Its not a matter of foreign policy, we invaded and took over Iraq, that’s a bit more then talks in any dimension of the idea.
QUOTE
whether we should treat foreign governments as sovereign entities, or if we should deal directly with the people and whatever the latest opinion poll says to form policy
Sorry, I have a hard time discerning the two, more so when they happen to be or are supposed to be representative of the people, its just a bit confusing to me as to why we would not care about the popular opinion of Iraqis, or is this some elite class issue and then the regular Joe Blow that needs to go die in some war for stock profits.
QUOTE
There is a word for that.. it is anarchy. Don't confuse that with democracy, which is quite the opposite.
No, if you are a politician and you don’t care about the opinion of the people that make up your democracy, don’t be surprised if they don’t care much for you.
QUOTE(gordo @ Nov 1 2006, 11:31 PM)
QUOTE
Again, this is a problem for the Iraqi government, not for us.
Sorry, could you explain to me how these items are independent of each other.
In our dealings with foreign countries, we deal with their government. How that government deals with its people is a matter solely up to that government entity. Whether or not that their people support their policy doesn't change that process at all. Again, what about the example of China. Are you really willing to state that if, as is quite likely if not certain, a poll showed the overwhelming majority of Chinese wanted democracy that we should invade, start WWIII, and enforce that? That we should disenfranchise all governments and throw the world into anarchy? All of this based on the known whims of polls, with no indication that any of the opinions expressed are even informed opinions? I'm not sure that is a path you'd want to go down.
QUOTE(gordo @ Nov 2 2006, 04:31 AM)
Hey, I don’t think this is the first time we have been asked to leave, I think the government of Iraq even asked us to. Its not a matter of foreign policy, we invaded and took over Iraq, that’s a bit more then talks in any dimension of the idea.
Do you have a cite for this? My understanding is that the newly elected Iraq government does wants us to leave, but not until they are sure they are able to sustain the country.
Baghdad - Iraq plans to ask the United Nations Security Council to extend the mandate governing the presence of US-led forces in Iraq for another year, Foreign Minister Hoshiyar Zebari said on Monday.
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
Well, a clear majority of Iraqi's probably didn't want us to invade, or give us trade sanction, or blow up thier country to levels even worse than before the war started- so I don't think American's in general or our goverment really has even given a rat's fanny about Iraq other than getting revenge on the Iraqi poeple for Saddam Hussien. Just look to your left or right in any conversation not moderated like this board and you will have a few that are into just nuking the place. The entire war is really GW wanting revenge, and nothing more- that is why we are having so much problems- Saddam is gone- now what?
- We are the bad guys in this occupation, always have been- so we simply CAN NOT all a truly duly elected goverment into power- because it would not be in our interests to do so-
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
Because the Iraqi goverment is a puppet goverment, allowed just enough leash to look semi-independent- but not really allowed to make decisions like that- you see, if the Iraqi "goverment" that we installed asked us to leave, and we did, most of them would not last a week past our pullout- one group would grab power, probably those that represent shi-ites, and they would denounce the rest of the officials as "US collaborators" and those poeple would die.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Those that claim we endanger peace by staying are not exactly in the position for anyone to trust thier judgements at this time- it is all political face saving, not much to do with the good of the US, our troops or peace in the middle east- GW and gang want to try to weasel a way out without looking like they took us to war in Iraq for no good reason, with no plan to get out. There are still enough poeple out there defending GWs every move like it came from Gawd herself for the anti-GW forces to just roll over him.
GW doesn't care about troops, Iraqi poeple or anything else rather than salvaging what is left of his miserable presidency- and that is not even looking succesful at this point.
Well, a clear majority of Iraqi's probably didn't want us to invade, or give us trade sanction, or blow up thier country to levels even worse than before the war started- so I don't think American's in general or our goverment really has even given a rat's fanny about Iraq other than getting revenge on the Iraqi poeple for Saddam Hussien. Just look to your left or right in any conversation not moderated like this board and you will have a few that are into just nuking the place. The entire war is really GW wanting revenge, and nothing more- that is why we are having so much problems- Saddam is gone- now what?
- We are the bad guys in this occupation, always have been- so we simply CAN NOT all a truly duly elected goverment into power- because it would not be in our interests to do so- If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
Because the Iraqi goverment is a puppet goverment, allowed just enough leash to look semi-independent- but not really allowed to make decisions like that- you see, if the Iraqi "goverment" that we installed asked us to leave, and we did, most of them would not last a week past our pullout- one group would grab power, probably those that represent shi-ites, and they would denounce the rest of the officials as "US collaborators" and those poeple would die.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Those that claim we endanger peace by staying are not exactly in the position for anyone to trust thier judgements at this time- it is all political face saving, not much to do with the good of the US, our troops or peace in the middle east- GW and gang want to try to weasel a way out without looking like they took us to war in Iraq for no good reason, with no plan to get out. There are still enough poeple out there defending GWs every move like it came from Gawd herself for the anti-GW forces to just roll over him.
GW doesn't care about troops, Iraqi poeple or anything else rather than salvaging what is left of his miserable presidency- and that is not even looking succesful at this point.
QUOTE
Do you have a cite for this? My understanding is that the newly elected Iraq government does wants us to leave, but not until they are sure they are able to sustain the country.
All you have to do is hit Google search and you will be buried in links with polls and data showing Iraqis and its government interested in getting us to leave. I don’t remember the date also but yes the government asked for a timeline for U.S withdraw, probably what this is coming from. Heck even the insurgents asked to leave saying they would stop fighting
The links will be from the youth to the government, also I did not count but there are many many polls supporting this with there data.
QUOTE
In our dealings with foreign countries, we deal with their government. How that government deals with its people is a matter solely up to that government entity. Whether or not that their people support their policy doesn't change that process at all. Again, what about the example of China. Are you really willing to state that if, as is quite likely if not certain, a poll showed the overwhelming majority of Chinese wanted democracy that we should invade, start WWIII, and enforce that? That we should disenfranchise all governments and throw the world into anarchy? All of this based on the known whims of polls, with no indication that any of the opinions expressed are even informed opinions? I'm not sure that is a path you'd want to go down.
I understand where you are coming from, I really do, the point I am trying to make is this. We don’t invade nations every other day, that’s a rather extreme form of foreign policy, and the whole basis of our invasion was to make Iraq a democracy, well that have a government and saddam is gone, we are done, if we do not care about the voice of the people in a nation we have occupied by military force, I have no idea but I do not think that’s a positive move to make in any aspect of the word, another is how the heck are the local Iraqis going to care about there government if the government really only listens to the U.S, its a democracy after all.
A while back, I considered posting a similar thread, though not one specific to Iraq. This isn't really new, though the situation is vastly more violent in Iraq than elsewhere. The population of Okinawa, for instance, has wished for troops to leave forever...but the government wants us to stay. Similarly, the South Koreans have wished us to leave (if not the majority, than a very loud and vocal large minority) but the South Korean government wishes us to stay. All the while, the anti-Americanism is aided by politicians in those areas looking for short term political gain. So, the governments ask us to stay, as the politicians speak about how evil we are from the other side of their mouths...effectively exacerbating the situation. It's not a small problem, but a big one that is getting bigger. And I have to wonder if the Iraqi politicians are doing the same thing.
Here is a link to a pdf file of one of the actual polls used for this article. What I find most interesting here is the astoundingly high opinion the polled Iraqis have for their own security forces and government. It seems that, as the situation in Iraq has grown worse security-wise, the population's confidence in the Interior Ministry is 62 percent, its police 71 percent. This contradicts the impression I had been under before reading this study.
This study leads me to conclude that the Iraq population at large, six in ten of whom (according to this poll) support attacks against our troops, has decided that we are the problem and those internal strife issues will just miraculously end, somehow, when we leave. I say we give them their wish. That's the only solution I can see. What are our 130 thousand able to do other than provide themselves as targets at this point? Lowering that number to 60,000 won't help a thing...all of the local disadvantages of having our force presence with even fewer advantages.
Here is a link to a pdf file of one of the actual polls used for this article. What I find most interesting here is the astoundingly high opinion the polled Iraqis have for their own security forces and government. It seems that, as the situation in Iraq has grown worse security-wise, the population's confidence in the Interior Ministry is 62 percent, its police 71 percent. This contradicts the impression I had been under before reading this study.
This study leads me to conclude that the Iraq population at large, six in ten of whom (according to this poll) support attacks against our troops, has decided that we are the problem and those internal strife issues will just miraculously end, somehow, when we leave. I say we give them their wish. That's the only solution I can see. What are our 130 thousand able to do other than provide themselves as targets at this point? Lowering that number to 60,000 won't help a thing...all of the local disadvantages of having our force presence with even fewer advantages.
While its probably impossible to actually know what’s going to happen to Iraq when we leave I do think its paramount to factor in the decision of the locals. I am not some person that is hot on decision physics or anything like that, I don’t have privy to all the intelligence reports on Iraq, or even close, i have polls and what i see in the news. Now basically its just been bad all around in my opinion, I also think it would not be like this at all if the culture of Iraq at large appreciated what we are doing, call it a guess but I think if we truly were met as liberators the gorilla fighters would never have had a solid leg to stand on being there survival basically is entwined with the local culture.
Now I know polls are something that are not specific in value for the most part. I will say though that if you start to get lots of polls from different groups that reach in general the same conclusions that is some pretty conclusive evidence of mainstream opinion.
Saddam and the wmd threat is gone, they have a democratically elected government, they also have a civil war going, along with regular attacks on our troops. Now if you follow the idea that staying the course will somehow make everything better, which in my opinion on a graph of sorts Iraq has been basically getting worse overtime, I don’t know how you reach it is all I am saying.
If the local culture has the idea it wants us gone in a big way, this is noting but a big thumbs up for the insurgency with what I can only guess no real roadblock to stop them either from being a insurgency that is not going to die off.
So that brings us to a stalemate really, so in that light will today’s Iraq be the same in four years from now, who knows really, but if it will staying the course still be the big thing, and of course at what cost, so we can view more polls reaching the same conclusion, with a helpless Iraqi government puppet to the wants of the U.S? One thing that could happen when we leave is we might be able to see many things we cant right now, or simply put on another view, maybe Iraq would settle down, maybe the civil war will go full scale and maybe actually end, simply to me us keeping it low intensity without being able to end why it occurs, will only drag it out for who knows how long, maybe forever, along with an insurgency that will not end, and a slowly destroyed Iraq with bloated death tolls all around the board.
The other boat is what we are doing somehow is going to surface in success, the people of Iraq will come to love us thus killing off the insurgencies life support save for small bands and the government and all the people of Iraq will come together.
Now I know polls are something that are not specific in value for the most part. I will say though that if you start to get lots of polls from different groups that reach in general the same conclusions that is some pretty conclusive evidence of mainstream opinion.
Saddam and the wmd threat is gone, they have a democratically elected government, they also have a civil war going, along with regular attacks on our troops. Now if you follow the idea that staying the course will somehow make everything better, which in my opinion on a graph of sorts Iraq has been basically getting worse overtime, I don’t know how you reach it is all I am saying.
If the local culture has the idea it wants us gone in a big way, this is noting but a big thumbs up for the insurgency with what I can only guess no real roadblock to stop them either from being a insurgency that is not going to die off.
So that brings us to a stalemate really, so in that light will today’s Iraq be the same in four years from now, who knows really, but if it will staying the course still be the big thing, and of course at what cost, so we can view more polls reaching the same conclusion, with a helpless Iraqi government puppet to the wants of the U.S? One thing that could happen when we leave is we might be able to see many things we cant right now, or simply put on another view, maybe Iraq would settle down, maybe the civil war will go full scale and maybe actually end, simply to me us keeping it low intensity without being able to end why it occurs, will only drag it out for who knows how long, maybe forever, along with an insurgency that will not end, and a slowly destroyed Iraq with bloated death tolls all around the board.
The other boat is what we are doing somehow is going to surface in success, the people of Iraq will come to love us thus killing off the insurgencies life support save for small bands and the government and all the people of Iraq will come together.
QUOTE(gordo @ Nov 2 2006, 06:01 PM)
QUOTE
Do you have a cite for this? My understanding is that the newly elected Iraq government does wants us to leave, but not until they are sure they are able to sustain the country.
All you have to do is hit Google search and you will be buried in links with polls and data showing Iraqis and its government interested in getting us to leave. I don’t remember the date also but yes the government asked for a timeline for U.S withdraw, probably what this is coming from. Heck even the insurgents asked to leave saying they would stop fighting
The links will be from the youth to the government, also I did not count but there are many many polls supporting this with there data.
I provided a link that show a request from the Iraqi government to the security council that the US and coalition forces remain in Iraq another year.
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Nov 2 2006, 03:07 PM)
Here is a link to a pdf file of one of the actual polls used for this article. What I find most interesting here is the astoundingly high opinion the polled Iraqis have for their own security forces and government. It seems that, as the situation in Iraq has grown worse security-wise, the population's confidence in the Interior Ministry is 62 percent, its police 71 percent. This contradicts the impression I had been under before reading this study.
This study leads me to conclude that the Iraq population at large, six in ten of whom (according to this poll) support attacks against our troops, has decided that we are the problem and those internal strife issues will just miraculously end, somehow, when we leave. I say we give them their wish. That's the only solution I can see. What are our 130 thousand able to do other than provide themselves as targets at this point? Lowering that number to 60,000 won't help a thing...all of the local disadvantages of having our force presence with even fewer advantages.
Mrs. P. this is a survey that is most likely a cluster survey, took 4 days to complete, and had a sample size of 1,150 people. Furthermore they admit in the survey that they had a "oversample of Sunni Arabs." It has been argued elsewhere that such a sample size is not representative of the whole Iraqi population and the legitimacy cluster sampling has been called into question. How can you base your opinion on such a survey?
QUOTE(psyclist @ Nov 2 2006, 06:27 PM)
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Nov 2 2006, 03:07 PM)
Here is a link to a pdf file of one of the actual polls used for this article. What I find most interesting here is the astoundingly high opinion the polled Iraqis have for their own security forces and government. It seems that, as the situation in Iraq has grown worse security-wise, the population's confidence in the Interior Ministry is 62 percent, its police 71 percent. This contradicts the impression I had been under before reading this study.
This study leads me to conclude that the Iraq population at large, six in ten of whom (according to this poll) support attacks against our troops, has decided that we are the problem and those internal strife issues will just miraculously end, somehow, when we leave. I say we give them their wish. That's the only solution I can see. What are our 130 thousand able to do other than provide themselves as targets at this point? Lowering that number to 60,000 won't help a thing...all of the local disadvantages of having our force presence with even fewer advantages.
Mrs. P. this is a survey that is most likely a cluster survey, took 4 days to complete, and had a sample size of 1,150 people. Furthermore they admit in the survey that they had a "oversample of Sunni Arabs." It has been argued elsewhere that such a sample size is not representative of the whole Iraqi population and the legitimacy cluster sampling has been called into question. How can you base your opinion on such a survey?
Well, it is the specific subject for debate on this thread.
I have given you the link to PIPA poll that is the subject of the article that Christopher has referenced. If you don't think it's representative, I can certainly be persuaded that it isn't, but this is my conclusions based on this specific poll.From Christopher's article:
QUOTE
The Program on International Policy Attitudes poll, which was conducted over the first three days of September for WorldPublicOpinion.org, found that support among Sunni Muslims for a withdrawal of all U.S.-led forces within six months dropped to 57 percent in September from 83 percent in January.
"There is a kind of softening of Sunni attitudes toward the U.S.," said Steven Kull, director of PIPA and editor of WorldPublicOpinion.org. "But you can't go so far as to say the majority of Sunnis don't want the U.S. out. They do. They're just not quite in the same hurry as they were before."
The PIPA poll, which has a margin of error of 3 percent, was carried out by Iraqis in all 18 provinces who conducted interviews with more than 1,000 randomly selected Iraqis in their homes.
"There is a kind of softening of Sunni attitudes toward the U.S.," said Steven Kull, director of PIPA and editor of WorldPublicOpinion.org. "But you can't go so far as to say the majority of Sunnis don't want the U.S. out. They do. They're just not quite in the same hurry as they were before."
The PIPA poll, which has a margin of error of 3 percent, was carried out by Iraqis in all 18 provinces who conducted interviews with more than 1,000 randomly selected Iraqis in their homes.
So, do you believe that the Iraqis really do want us to stay? Or do you disagree with the other results to this poll, but agree with that one?
QUOTE(Mrs. Pigpen @ Nov 2 2006, 08:08 PM)
Well, it is the specific subject for debate on this thread.
I have given you the link to PIPA poll that is the subject of the article that Christopher has referenced. If you don't think it's representative, I can certainly be persuaded that it isn't, but this is my conclusions based on this specific poll.From Christopher's article:
QUOTE
The Program on International Policy Attitudes poll, which was conducted over the first three days of September for WorldPublicOpinion.org, found that support among Sunni Muslims for a withdrawal of all U.S.-led forces within six months dropped to 57 percent in September from 83 percent in January.
"There is a kind of softening of Sunni attitudes toward the U.S.," said Steven Kull, director of PIPA and editor of WorldPublicOpinion.org. "But you can't go so far as to say the majority of Sunnis don't want the U.S. out. They do. They're just not quite in the same hurry as they were before."
The PIPA poll, which has a margin of error of 3 percent, was carried out by Iraqis in all 18 provinces who conducted interviews with more than 1,000 randomly selected Iraqis in their homes.
"There is a kind of softening of Sunni attitudes toward the U.S.," said Steven Kull, director of PIPA and editor of WorldPublicOpinion.org. "But you can't go so far as to say the majority of Sunnis don't want the U.S. out. They do. They're just not quite in the same hurry as they were before."
The PIPA poll, which has a margin of error of 3 percent, was carried out by Iraqis in all 18 provinces who conducted interviews with more than 1,000 randomly selected Iraqis in their homes.
So, do you believe that the Iraqis really do want us to stay? Or do you disagree with the other results to this poll, but agree with that one?
I'm just surprised you and others accepted this poll as legitimate without first questioning the validity of the poll. It seems you could make the same arguments against this poll that others have made against the Lancet study yet you did not. I'm just wondering what the difference is? Why are you can draw a conclusion from this poll and not the Lancet. Though this is probably a question for another thread.
QUOTE(psyclist @ Nov 2 2006, 09:26 PM)
I'm just surprised you and others accepted this poll as legitimate without first questioning the validity of the poll. It seems you could make the same arguments against this poll that others have made against the Lancet study yet you did not. I'm just wondering what the difference is? Why are you can draw a conclusion from this poll and not the Lancet. Though this is probably a question for another thread.
In the case of the Lancet study:
1) The thread specifically asked posters to assess the validity of the study.
2) There was a nebulous history of accuracy for Lancet polls...every one of them (out of three in Iraq during the past ten years) gave results five fold or higher than other polls...some of which were vastly more comprehensive.
3) The numbers themselves didn't pass the reasonability test...500 extra violent deaths every single day on average for four years?
4) More that I won't go into, but were all addressed there.
So with the above in mind, if you have some basis for comparison that would contradict the poll results for this particular thread, please share. I'd definitely like to see it.
If a clear majority of the Iraqi people want us to leave, should we do as they wish and begin to withdraw our soldiers?
No. I feel we are obligated under international law to remain in Iraq until it can no longer be considered a humanitarian crisis and some sort of peace and security is achieved.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
I don’t see the two as separate as the Iraqis chose the govt. to be their representative. If the Iraqis as a whole nation feel that strongly about US troops leaving Iraq I would imagine such a policy would be also adopted by the Govt. I happen to think there just might be more pressing matters that Iraqis are more concerned about right now.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Well the nation and a good many citizens of Sudan don’t want foreign intervention or troop deployment into their country either and would also consider it to be an invasion, as I am sure it was perceived by the Yugoslavian govt and a good many of their citizens too. Often it is not a matter of respecting the sovereign rights of a nation when you practice and work to achieve universal human rights.
No. I feel we are obligated under international law to remain in Iraq until it can no longer be considered a humanitarian crisis and some sort of peace and security is achieved.
If the Iraqi Government states they want us to stay but the Iraqi people make it clear they want us to leave, whose wishes get precedence?
I don’t see the two as separate as the Iraqis chose the govt. to be their representative. If the Iraqis as a whole nation feel that strongly about US troops leaving Iraq I would imagine such a policy would be also adopted by the Govt. I happen to think there just might be more pressing matters that Iraqis are more concerned about right now.
Even though some may claim we will endanger peace in the ME or that we ourselves may be in greater danger because of early withdrawal, does that give us the right to ignore the wishes of the Iraqi people and keep our troops there?
Well the nation and a good many citizens of Sudan don’t want foreign intervention or troop deployment into their country either and would also consider it to be an invasion, as I am sure it was perceived by the Yugoslavian govt and a good many of their citizens too. Often it is not a matter of respecting the sovereign rights of a nation when you practice and work to achieve universal human rights.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.