Sunday, October 23, 2005

Hearts And Minds

From The Sunday Telegraph:
Secret MoD poll: Iraqis support attacks on British troops

Millions of Iraqis believe that suicide attacks against British troops are justified, a secret military poll commissioned by senior officers has revealed.

The poll, undertaken for the Ministry of Defence and seen by The Sunday Telegraph, shows that up to 65 per cent of Iraqi citizens support attacks and fewer than one per cent think Allied military involvement is helping to improve security in their country.

It demonstrates for the first time the true strength of anti-Western feeling in Iraq after more than two and a half years of bloody occupation.

The nationwide survey also suggests that the coalition has lost the battle to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people, which Tony Blair and George W Bush believed was fundamental to creating a safe and secure country.

The Sunday Telegraph disclosed last month that a plan for an early withdrawal of British troops had been shelved because of the failing security situation, sparking claims that Iraq was rapidly becoming "Britain's own Vietnam".

The survey was conducted by an Iraqi university research team that, for security reasons, was not told the data it compiled would be used by coalition forces. It reveals:

• Forty-five per cent of Iraqis believe attacks against British and American troops are justified - rising to 65 per cent in the British-controlled Maysan province;

• 82 per cent are "strongly opposed" to the presence of coalition troops;

• less than one per cent of the population believes coalition forces are responsible for any improvement in security;

• 67 per cent of Iraqis feel less secure because of the occupation;

• 43 per cent of Iraqis believe conditions for peace and stability have worsened;

• 72 per cent do not have confidence in the multi-national forces.

The opinion poll, carried out in August, also debunks claims by both the US and British governments that the general well-being of the average Iraqi is improving in post-Saddam Iraq.

The report profiles those likely to carry out attacks against British and American troops as being "less than 26 years of age, more likely to want a job, more likely to have been looking for work in the last four weeks and less likely to have enough money even for their basic needs".

Let me help the apologists, enablers and spinners get started:

1. Democracy is a messy process.
2. 82% of Iraqis are dead-enders.
3. The poll takers were in their last throes.
4. A rock-solid 18% does not strongly oppose our military presence! As the other 82% of Iraqis stand up, we will stand down.
5. Less than 26 years of age, looking for a job, and without enough money for even basic needs? Terrorist.

27 Comments:

Blogger James Finkelstein (Ga.) said...

What does it say about the state of our country's leadership that your satirical comments will most likely mirror official response to the poll? This assumes they don't completely ignore it. I'll have to watch Meet the Press tomorrow to see if Tim Russert puts this on the screen in the face of a Republican.

10/22/2005 9:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

ferkrisesake. This needs to become a part of the conventional wisdom about occupation and trying to create democracy at gunpoint. In "Dying to Win", Robert Pape compiled the astounding statistic that 95% of all suicide attacks are carried out by people whose territory is occupied BY A DEMOCRATIC STATE. 95%! If serious people were in charge, this kind of analysis would receive serious consideration, but for the not-serious people who really are in charge, their best guess is 'they hate freedom'.

10/22/2005 10:05 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

The fragile state of our Democracy is frightening.

Top former Bush administration official comes out and says the White House has been taken over by a cabal and that George Bush is overmatched for his position.

10/22/2005 10:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anon 1, I believe we err to think the people in charge are not serious, or that they actually believe that 'the terrorists hate us for our freedoms'. No, their intent is deadly serious, as anybody familiar with PNAC has long known.

Their platitudes and lies are meant for a gullible public. We should have taken W seriously in March of 2001, when he said at a Washington dinner: "You can fool some of the people all the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."

10/22/2005 10:36 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Be careful, Fox might want to hire you ;-)

Karen Hughes didn't win the hearts and minds.

Over 1400 more soldiers have died, 10's of thousands injured and maimed, since Bush made fun of not finding WMD's in front of journalists at a black-tie event.

PS: Did you hear the rumor that Bush is going to appoint his personal accountant to replace Greenspan ;-|

10/23/2005 2:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well, the question is: Would Iraq be better off with or without our presence? Iraqis themselves seem to think "without." We should listen to them and leave, right? If we stay, we will probably be forced to leave anyway.

10/23/2005 3:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Are we safer yet?

Al-Zarqawi's terror reign gets larger
Militant expanded operations globally, gaining strength and followers

...
U.S. intelligence officials say Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has expanded his terrorism campaign in Iraq to extremists in two dozen terror groups scattered across almost 40 countries, creating a network that rivals Osama bin Laden's.

In interviews, U.S. government officials said the threat to U.S. interests from al-Zarqawi compared with that from bin Laden, whom al-Zarqawi pledged his loyalty to one year ago.

The director of the National Counterterrorism Center considers bin Laden a strategic plotter who is deep in hiding and out of regular contact with his followers, while al-Zarqawi is involved broadly in the planning of scores of brutal attacks in Iraq.

"He is very much a daily, operational threat," said Scott Redd, who is in charge of the government's counterterrorism strategy and analysis.
...

40 countries! That brings a whole new meaning to "fight them over there, so we don't have to fight them here" It is too bad Bin Laden couldn't have used his talent for good. He would have made a hell of a FEMA director to replace Mike Brown the Arabian Horse Show lawyer who is still on the payroll as a consultant.

10/23/2005 10:14 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

You didn't work the purple finger/voting thing in you list.

10/24/2005 12:14 PM  
Blogger David the Gyromancer said...

OK, a vast majority of Iraqis want the Western occupation to end immediately.

I believe the consequences of immediate pullout would probably include lots of chaos, and ultimately possibly an Islamic dicatorship could ensue. But we have no legitimacy prolonging an occupation of a country that's overwhelmingly opposed to us, and which never attacked us. As Edward R. Murrow put it, as depicted in the current film, "I've searched my conscience, and I just can't see any justification for this."

As I see it, the only rational alternative to immediate pullout is immediate commencement of a real, serious, no-kidding orderly disengagement. One year tops. Anything else, there's a word for it, loaded with overtones, yeah, but nonetheless inescapable: Imperialism.

10/24/2005 12:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Does anybody remember this?

"Cakewalk In Iraq

By Ken Adelman
Wednesday, February 13, 2002

(...) I believe demolishing Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk. Let me give simple, responsible reasons: (1) It was a cakewalk last time; (2) they've become much weaker; (3) we've become much stronger; and (4) now we're playing for keeps.(...)"


The writer was assistant to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld from 1975 to 1977, and arms control director under President Ronald Reagan.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A1996-2002Feb12?language=printer


How about this dude?

"DoD News Briefing - Secretary Rumsfeld and Gen. Myers
Friday, April 11, 2003

Rumsfeld: Good afternoon. Wednesday's events in Baghdad were remarkable [...]

[...] I think it's increasingly clear that most welcome coalition forces and see them not as invaders or occupiers, but as liberators.

The images of thousands of cheering Iraqis, celebrating and embracing coalition forces, are being broadcast throughout the world, including the Arab world."


(Btw, that's the same press conference where he said: "Andm it's untidy, and freedom's untidy, and free people are free to make mistakes and commit crimes and do bad things."

http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2003/tr20030411-secdef0090.html


"Free people are free to commit crimes"....omg!

Later, when confronted with these statements, he denied having ever said it:

"In a September 25 interview, a reporter from Sinclair Broadcasting said to Rumsfeld, "Before the war in Iraq... you said they would welcome us with open arms." Rumsfeld responded with a denial:

Never said that.... Never did. You may remember it well, but you're thinking of somebody else. You can't find anywhere me saying anything like [that].... I never said anything like that because I never knew what would happen and I knew I didn't know.


But on February 20, Rumsfeld was asked by PBS's Jim Lehrer: "Do you expect the invasion, if it comes, to be welcomed by the majority of the civilian population of Iraq?" And Rumsfeld responded: "There is no question but that they would be welcomed. Go back to Afghanistan--the people were in the streets playing music, cheering, flying kites, and doing all the things that the Taliban and the Al Qaeda would not let them do.""

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1161


"Never said that.... Never did."

Very funny...not! F$%&§g liar!

10/24/2005 1:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Oh, just noticed this:

Rummy:

"I never said anything like that because I never knew what would happen and I knew I didn't know"


Must have been one of the known unknowns, then...

If it weren't so sad I'd be laughing hysterically.

10/24/2005 1:56 PM  
Blogger Roy said...

I agree with the comment, the main question is: Are you better off with or without Saddam? Or how about would you rather the US never got involved, in the first place?
43% believve conditions for peace & stability have worsened? What was the number of Iraqis who thought peace was likely under their brutal dictator. First, one can only place so much confidence in polls. I am sure that no war opponent suddenly became a believer with the news that a poll suggests that Iraqis are happy Saddam is gone. But for any of this to have any validity we would have to see polls from before the invasion.

"The opinion poll, carried out in August, also debunks claims by both the US and British governments that the general well-being of the average Iraqi is improving in post-Saddam Iraq."
Would that be the hundreds of thousads of Iraqis that Saddam gassed? Sounds alot like even the slaves agree that they were better on the plantations. The world would be much simpler if only every country but ours was ruled by a dictator who could suppress the will and desires of his population.

That being said if the polls continue like this than maybe an early exit is coming sooner than we think.

10/24/2005 6:23 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Interesting statistic: "The nearly 2,000 Americans killed in combat (1,998 on October 24, 2005) in Iraq since 2003 are more than were lost in Vietnam combat in the first four years of U.S. combat (1961-1965, when just over 1800 died). This total is more than were lost in the last two years of combat (1971-1972, when just over 1600 died),"...

10/24/2005 10:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

bush co can call iraq an insurgency all they want, yet not be able to change what is happening from the resistance that it is.

bush is the worlds worst enemy simply because he has aligned himself with the same ugly neocons who have ruined and taken over your party.

nice world you enabled! but then, i'm one of those traitorous liberals who served honorably in the USN, then again in EMS and work healthcare.

i no longer recognize the authority of this government to serve, as it has failed so miserably at its main task. the star chamber bull shit has run amok and this government is broken both in trust and in deed.

now, how do we fix this and rebuild on the original ideals and bones of who we ASPIRED to be all along as a nation? (unfullfilled dream that that was...)

got me, looks more like we're the failed nation. didn't take long, did it?! how very sad.

feral

10/25/2005 11:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I see another truth… I see an Iraq that will someday become a strong and prosperous nation. All they have to do is ignore liberal propaganda that tells them they do not have a chance in hell of succeeding with the U.S. helping them. What silly nonsense. I am glad the Germans and the Japanese took the "time" and "supreme effort" to rebuild their countries (with the help of the nations they were once at war with) and not give up. I get tired of the DOOM SAYING of the Left. If you have, any ideas that you think will help... bring them to the table. Otherwise - stop belly aching... That way you will be part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Have you read this article by Joe Lieberman? You may have to sign up to read it…

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007611

12/01/2005 5:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi,

This certain five-star blog can be a sort of helping hand to me. I wish to start a five-star blog using same blogger account as this.

Can anyone please tell me how to make a five-star blog similar to this? I want many visitors for my five-star blog but do not know how...

Any idea is appreciated.
You can email me to karlsult@gmail.com too.

Thanks,
five-star blog

2/05/2006 1:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have been following a site now for almost 2 years and I have found it to be both reliable and profitable. They post daily and their stock trades have been beating
the indexes easily.

Take a look at Wallstreetwinnersonline.com

RickJ

2/05/2006 2:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello:)

Something that I did not find in websites is sales pages......... Many website normally sell you something like dell...com or some other online store... I shall ask: Is it possible to create a site that contains items for sale... For example: Many websites sell books... Is it allowed to sell books from sites?

Regards,
money work at make home

2/25/2006 1:39 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hello, we have just finished creating this free questions and answers forum for members of The Country Club Biz. Please check it out at CC Biz Forum

4/10/2006 5:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi! How many blogs do you own? Can I post to them all?

health and wealth, transforming debt into wealth, gospel of wealth,

4/13/2006 1:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


real estate gainesville florida
Real Estate Investment - Create Fortune In Real Estate

Learn how to create a fortune and quit your job forever Building Portfolio That Allow You To Maintain Financial Independence. You can make money investing in real estate and you can learn to do it without all the high rolling bucks and hype.

Real Estate Investment for Beginners is written by Sal Vannutini, a veteran real estate investor. In one compact little book, he has written some powerful pearls of wisdom that pack a punch the likes of which doesn't even begin to get covered in all that other mess of tapes and paperwork.

Sal is going to give it to you straight! He's going to share his insider secrets with you - more than 80 of them! Real Estate Investment real estate gainesville florida

4/16/2006 1:51 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hi there! Very nice blog indeed that you have here, I like it a lot. Take good care of yourself.

Kind regards
Improvement of Yourself Blog

4/21/2006 2:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Very cool design! Useful information. Go on! » »

3/01/2007 3:21 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Enjoyed my stay. Definitely worth my time.

bankrupcy and bill consolodation loan

6/11/2007 8:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Malignant mesothelioma is a rare lung cancer which attacks the lining of the lung (pleural mesothelioma) or the lining of the abdomen (peritoneal mesothelioma). The only known cause of mesothelioma in North America is exposure to asbestos. There have also been reports linked to asbestos which include cancer of the esophagus, larynx, stomach, colon and rectum.
Like the other asbestos-related diseases, mesothelioma has a long latency period (amount of time between first exposure to asbestos and disease diagnosis). Typically, mesothelioma is diagnosed 20, 30, 40 or more years after the first exposure to asbestos. In rare cases the latency period has been as short as 10 to 15 years.
Pulmonary asbestosis is caused when asbestos particles are inhaled which can cause a scarring of the lung tissue. Similar to mesothelioma, the latency period is delayed 10 to 30 years. Symptoms of asbestosis can include shortness of breath or an inability to take a deep breath, fatigue, dry cough, rales or crackles at the base of the lungs. Other names for pulmonary asbestosis are pulmonary fibrosis, interstitial fibrosis, lung scarring, diffuse linear opacities (on x-ray) and pneumoconiosis

3/10/2009 3:26 PM  
Blogger hadengrant said...

Hearts and minds
It's creates major role in our system. If you are able to handle the sittuation around us. Then you can do everything, Other wise forget it.

Debt Consolidation Loan

10/12/2009 12:56 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Welcome to BayAreaLawyers.com We are your free directory of San Francisco Bay Area lawyers who provide free or paid consultations to local residents in California.

11/28/2010 6:21 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home