doglover wrote:Nah, I don't put much stock in that poll. I think, if anything, it's terribly inaccurate.
OCCOM BILL wrote:Regardless of how you view the numbers; I believe the majority of Iraqi's are glad we showed up.
Well, its when people from both sides of the debate start discounting a poll's results because they dont see what they had expected to find, that one starts believing a poll ... :wink:
Seriously tho, re: Bill's point, two things:
-
The poll does give data about whether they were "glad you showed up". The relevant questions here are:
*Q5: "From today's perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right, somewhat right, somewhat wrong or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition forces invaded Iraq in Spring 2003?"
Absolutely right 19.6% +
Somewhat right 28.6% = 48,2%
Somewhat wrong 12.9% +
Absolutely wrong 26.2% = 39,1%
Difficult to say 12.7%
*Q6: "Apart from right and wrong, do you feel the US-led coalition force invasion:"
Humiliated Iraq 41.2%
Liberated Iraq 41.8%
Difficult to say 17.0%
So basically according to this poll, back in March at least, there was a
plurality of Iraqis "glad you showed up" - but not a
majority (over 50%). Which suggests that the Americans were enjoying a rather delicate favour among the Iraqi "man in the street".
-
As for your second point, that ..
OCCOM BILL wrote:divorcing our 'presence' from the liberating action itself, while interesting for a poll, is absurd in reality."
.. you have a point there, of course.
Yes, even if Iraqi public opinion would have loved to have the liberation, but without the occupation, that doesn't necessarily make it practically feasible. Just like Americans (or Dutch) can indicate in every poll that they want lower taxes, higher spending on education and health care
and a lower deficit, but that dont make the combination any more of a feasible policy. Totally true.
Yet I would say that it would at least be important to
acknowledge that this is, in fact, the way Iraqis feel. 51% opposed the presence of Coalition Forces in Iraq - 31% did so strongly. Only 13% "strongly supported it. And that was before the latest escalation of violence, which, with its bombing of a mosque, regardless of whether that was justfied or not, most probably didnt make the troops more popular among Iraqis.
If you don't keep this in mind - if you keep looking at the scene, whether you're Rumsfeld or Bill Occom, from the assumption that they're all really glad you're there, you're going to make misestimations and misinterpretations - in Rumsfeld's case dangerous misestimations.
Again, public opinion is fickle, and even if 51% opposed the troops in principle, only 15% wanted them to "leave now". A majority wanted them to stay until an Iraqi government is in place or security is restored. So there your assumption is confirmed, Bill, that you're expected to "finish what you started".
But when deciding what "finished" means, when that is, and how best to get to that point, you
have to keep that other fact - of a majority of Iraqis in principle opposing your presence, and some 4 out of 10 of 'em feeling humiliated by it - in mind. The image that the silent majority is solidly supportive and grateful is a dangerous fiction, that could lead to some greatly misunderstood strategic steps.