[tw]

Originally Posted by Bullitt

The whole "findings" are some pretty shaky ground as far as I am concerned. A poll of 1,150 people.. out of a population of 26,783,383 (July 2006 est.)

Then your news sources must be dominated by Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and other disciples of propaganda. Those findings only confirm what reports said even in 2003. Where have you been all these years? Listening to a lying president, or instead talking to honest Americans.

Why does every US general who served in Iraq and who is now retired say things that agree with that poll? Why was this post of 9 September 2003 so accurate?

Major Concession
Iraq is becoming the quagmire that military generals warned about. Only right wing extremists did not hear those reports and those warnings. Only right wing extremist contradict the military and say we have enough troops in Iraq. Only right wing extremist would have us forget what generals, now removed by Rumsfeld, were warning about. At least 200,000 troops for up to five years in Iraq. Leaves nothing to rebuild Afghanistan.

The US desperately needs international help because the long term situation in Iraq is not good and getting worse. Those are facts from so many sources who speak Arabic and have been there. Eliminate the administraton lies and the reports are a country that is now in anarchy almost everywhere. And a civilian administrator that has no representative outside of Baghdad - because the Paul Bremer program is in disarray.

Or from Jun 2005

Why did we go into Iraq?
What is the purpose of war? To return a conflict to the negotiation table. The most stupendous military victory can be lost if the political side does not plan for the peace. It is why war is fought with a strategic objective. It is why plans for the 'peace' settlement are made often before the first major battles are even fought. Informed political leaders are taught the lessons of history - including the most simple of facts from Sze Tsu's 500 BC book "Art of War". An informed neocon administration would have clearly understood that the police and army are never disbanded. But that is the difference between those who learn from history verses extremists who want to fix history with a political agenda.

Violate such well proven principles and the population will despise its military occupiers. How many times must it happen in history before you concede? That poll only confirms again what history teaches.

24 May 2004:

Exit Strategy
First thing noted by Dexter Filkins of the NY Times (interviewed by the PBS Newshour) is how Iraqis show no remorse for those dead. He is quite blunt about how bad Iraqi attitudes have become in only the last three months. So bad that reporters don't even dare leave or go to a border area where a 'wedding party' is said to have been slaughtered by American helicopters. ...

In many circles of political reporters, there is much speculation as to how much we will drop and back out - in a hope that others can take blame for any impending disaster or civil war. Iraq has become so bad that even reporters could not go out to confirm military reports since most of 2004. Iraqis that much hate foreign occupiers. Of the 2000 reconstruction projects, only 42 remain ongoing. Things are that bad.

Nov 2004:

U.S. Helicopters filmed firing into crowd of civilians
If the equipment was so vital, then why did soldiers leave it? Why would they abandon vital equipment in a town that supposidely wants American liberators? This event demonstrates a major disconnect. ...

Reporters, private contractors, and other nationals are saying this. Local temper is gently and increasingly becoming more anti-American. ... Using a missile to destroy vital equipment on streets containing civilians is only justified if the streets are full of unfriendlies. Obviously from the video, there were not masses of armed insurgents. So why would helicopters fire? Do we abandon equipment quickly - hope that choppers can destroy vital equipment later - because anti-American sentiment is that widespread even in Baghdad? ...

How to support the troops. Eliminate their biggest problem. A president that refuses to provide troops with a workable strategic objective, an exit strategy, or a political solution. What is a soldier suppose to do when the president even lies about this as being a 'war on terror'. Hell. I don't see Al Qaeda or bin Landen in Iraq. What I do see are many people who resent American occupation for good reason. Soldiers placed in a classic 'no win' situation.

Seven months of doing nothing - even denying that looting was ongoing as was predicted. What do you think would be the Iraqi opinion of Americans? Iraq was so dangerous for Americans two years ago that Americans never traveled outside the Green Zones without military escort. Instead you deny what was so obvious and confirmed by another poll? Do you also believe George Jr is honest and the moon is made of green cheese?

From The Economist of 1 Jan 2005:

The old man should have read the bilingual notices that American soldiers tack to their rear bumpers in Iraq: "Keep 50 meters or deadly force will be applied". In Ramadi, ... the marines are jumpy. Sometimes, they say, they fire on vehicles encroaching within 30 metres, sometimes they fire at 20 metres: "If anyone gets too close to us we fucking waste them", says a bullish lieutenant. "It's kind of a shame, because it means we've killed a lot of innocent people." ...

Since September 1st, when the battalion's 800 men were deployed to Ramadi, they have killed 400-500 people, according to one of their senior officers. A more precise estimate is impossible, because the marines rarely see their attackers. When fired upon, they retaliate by blitzing whichever buildings they think the fire is coming from: charred shells now line Ramadi's main streets. "Sometimes it works in the insurgents' favour", admits Rick Sims, a chief warrant officer. "Because by the time we've shot up the neighbourhood, then the guys have torn up a few houses, they're four blocks away, and we just end up pissing off the locals."

Good Morning Vietnam.

FISH - Fighting In Someone's House. IOW first throw in a grenade. Then learn who you have harmed - civilian or insurgent.

Posted on 12 Dec 2005:

Bush's Shrinking Safety Zone
Finally the BBC World Service reporter noted one more glaring fact. Last year, he recorded the poll's report from inside an Iraqi shopping mall. Today, he says, he does not dare enter that mall anymore. Doing so would only invite death or kidnapping.

Ten months ago, xoxoxoBruce notes that "Nothing unites a country like a common enemy."

There's other evidence of the United States' increasing unpopularity: Two-thirds now oppose the presence of U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq, 14 points higher than in February 2004. Nearly six in 10 disapprove of how the United States has operated in Iraq since the war, and most of them disapprove strongly. And nearly half of Iraqis would like to see U.S. forces leave soon.

Bullitt - maybe you would like to support your doubts with some facts?