Article

2004-05-20 Iraq-Jordan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Paul Moloney 2004-05-20 5:39:54 AM|| || Front Page|| [6 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Who did they poll, People marching in a pro-Sadr parade?

Posted by Charles 2004-05-20 6:55:50 AM|| 2004-05-20 6:55:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 The Iraqi's better be careful. We will be handing over the reins of power soon and it will make for an easy exit if they tell us they don't want us there.

Posted by B 2004-05-20 7:12:50 AM|| 2004-05-20 7:12:50 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 God this is going to get ugly. It's too bad too, I had very high hopes for Iraq. But I fear they will ask us to leave and we'll have to, because we said we would. Then it will be civil war. I have a theory: I believe that the sun and high temperatures of the middle east area has caused severe brain damage. Maybe even a permanent genetic mutation that causes severe insanity. Hopefully we can keep the Kurds well-armed. They seem at least half reasonable comapared to the rest of the locos.

Posted by AllahHateMe 2004-05-20 8:52:33 AM|| 2004-05-20 8:52:33 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Although the results of any poll in Iraqâs traumatised society should be taken with caution,

Did we forget the results are reported by the NY Times, aka Al Jazirra west, also should be taken with caution?

the survey highlights the difficulties facing the US authorities in Baghdad as they confront Mr Sadr, who launched an insurgency against the US-led occupation last month.

Wait a minute!! Has any one examined Sadr's financial records? How do we know he isn't being financed by outside elements? How do we know he isn't being financed by remnants of Saddam's regime, the powerful, uncaptured middle tier of regime loyalists? We all know that the media has a romanticized visage concerning 'insurgencies' and Sadr's 'insurgency' has all the earmarkings of a terrorist organization, not a mass movemement.

Saadoun Duleimi, head of the centre, said more than half of a representative sample - comprising 1,600 Shia, Sunni Arabs and Kurds polled in all Iraqâs main regions - wanted coalition troops to leave Iraq.

Ahhhh, more than half. This is the real news then. Not 90 percent.

This compares with about 20 per cent in an October survey. Some 88 per cent of respondents said they now regarded coalition forces in Iraq as occupiers.

We are occupiers. But we were liberators first, and when the bloody, murderous tragedy befalls Iraq if we are told to leave without rooting out the terroristic element in Iraq, we will know that A) This poll is a rigged lie or B) 88 percent of all Iraqis are idiots.

Respondents saw Mr Sadr as Iraqâs second most influential figure after Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, the countryâs most senior Shia cleric.

After 30 years of holy terror, Saddam would have held this mantle, too. Does that make Sadr influential. Of course, but does it mean he and his supporters have acquired this power by democratic means or because outside elements are greasing his palms.

Posted by badanov 2004-05-20 9:10:21 AM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2004-05-20 9:10:21 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 If we do leave I hope we would simply withdraw to the northern 'Kurds' and let the Iraqi's stew in their own choice.

I have my questions on this poll. Did they poll only in Sadr city and Fallujah?

Posted by CrazyFool 2004-05-20 9:35:38 AM|| 2004-05-20 9:35:38 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 We don't know yet which Iraqis we can trust and which ones we can't. Polling organizations are especially suspect. Who is likely to feel safe walking around asking questions of random people in areas where the extremists rule? Baathists or Islamists. The stuff about the CPA using these guys isn't real surprising - the War College also routinely solicits papers from the hate-America left in order to find out what the other side is thinking.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-05-20 9:45:47 AM|| 2004-05-20 9:45:47 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 "I somewhat support" Mr Sadr could simply mean i respect who his dad was. The other results are reasonable - support for Sistani, Jaafari and Pachachi seems in line with what we've heard. 50% wanting us to leave is probably a response to the deterioration of security - not, leave you big bad occupiers - more like - if youre not gonna protect us, whats the point? The support for Sadr though doesnt match what we've actually seen in the South, so I think it needs to be viewed with caution.

Posted by Liberalhawk 2004-05-20 10:35:51 AM|| 2004-05-20 10:35:51 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Liberalhawk: 50% wanting us to leave is probably a response to the deterioration of security - not, leave you big bad occupiers - more like - if youre not gonna protect us, whats the point?

I wonder how much of this is anger at the US shackling the Iraqi response. Would Iraqis use scorched earth tactics such as threatening the family members of the terrorists? It certainly worked for Saddam.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2004-05-20 10:49:54 AM|| 2004-05-20 10:49:54 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 This is poor polling analysis. It's a start...hopefully they get better with practice. May I suggest that they simply take a walk through Na'jaf and talk to the residents there. I think they would get a much more accurate (and quite different) result.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2004-05-20 10:57:00 AM|| 2004-05-20 10:57:00 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Polls are pretty much meaningless. First, rarely are "outsiders" given the exact question(s) asked in the polls. Questions phrased this way or that yield widely varying responses on the same (general) question. The reporting of results rarely give a clue as to the actual questions asked in the poll, or the way the questions were asked, factors which greatly impact those participating in the polls. Next, the demographics of those being polled need to be well-researched. And the people running the polls need to be unbiased. Finally, you have to have a good statistician for interpretation. Otherwise, it's nothing more than pseudo-official junk science falsely lending credibility to whatever the pollsters want to "prove."

Posted by ex-lib 2004-05-20 11:22:30 AM|| 2004-05-20 11:22:30 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 "Polls are not about who gives the answers, they are about who asks the questions." (Stalin)

Posted by True German Ally 2004-05-20 12:05:42 PM|| 2004-05-20 12:05:42 PM|| Front Page Top

#12 [Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]

Posted by Dog Bites Trolls TROLL 2004-05-20 12:31:53 PM|| 2004-05-20 12:31:53 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 Why wouldn't he be popular? The Bush-Powell-Bremer "faith based" brigade are afraid to kill this cockroach. Iraqis see America on its knees.

For more information: Defeatists r us.

Posted by badanov 2004-05-20 12:38:25 PM|| [http://www.rkka.org] 2004-05-20 12:38:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 The primary difficulty with the military operations in Iraq have been with the military attempting to separate the "innocent" and the "guilty". Shooting a bag guy surrounded by a pre-school class makes things difficult; it gets our guys killed. If there were only bad guys, it would be easier (in some ways) to just end the problem. Granted, there would be all sorts of political complications with the "World Community" (Muslims, and the People Who Want to be Ruled by Them).
Now, if we could just fight all the people who want to fight, it would make things substantially easier. Imagine WWII if we didn't get to kill so many Nazis or Emperor-loving-idiots before the occupation.
There is also this question: What if there are no "innocents" (as in, people who do not want to us)?

Posted by No Military Experience 2004-05-20 2:24:25 PM|| 2004-05-20 2:24:25 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Strategypage is reporting that the Iraqis mostly vote in tribal blocks in local elections. So do you think that people will tell the poller what they think or what the sheikh tell them to say?

Posted by 11A5S 2004-05-20 3:00:46 PM|| 2004-05-20 3:00:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 No Military experience - didn't you know? The only people without military experience who are allowed to pontificate on the war are those who are against the war. By the very nature of their having no military experience - it makes them experts in the area of what will happen if we don't fight or pull out.

Indeed they are experts - one need only look to the killing fields of Vietnam, Stalin, Sudan, etc. etc. to see how compassionate, humane and wise they are.

Posted by B 2004-05-20 3:09:16 PM|| 2004-05-20 3:09:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 oops...should be...Only people without military experience are allowed

Posted by B 2004-05-20 3:10:17 PM|| 2004-05-20 3:10:17 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Iraq The Model handles this question quite nicely...and so does TGA.

Posted by Rex Mundi 2004-05-20 3:25:51 PM|| 2004-05-20 3:25:51 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Off-topic or abusive comments deleted]

Posted by Dog Bites Trolls 2004-05-20 12:31:53 PM|| 2004-05-20 12:31:53 PM|| Front Page Top

12:59 Dog Bites Trolls
18:42 Dog Bites Trolls
05:12 Dog Bites Trolls
05:04 Dog Bites Trolls
04:57 Dog Bites Trolls
04:18 Dog Bites Trolls
03:12 Dog Bites Trolls
03:05 Dog Bites Trolls
00:33 Dog Bites Trolls
22:52 Dog Bites Trolls
22:19 Dog Bites Trolls
12:34 Dog Bites Trolls
12:33 Dog Bites Trolls
12:31 Dog Bites Trolls
12:26 Dog Bites Trolls
12:22 Dog Bites Trolls
22:27 Dog Bites Trolls
21:33 Dog Bites Trolls
23:47 Anonymous5485
13:33 haterofmuslimpigs
02:04 Anonymous5071
01:12 Mark Espinola
02:21 Not Mike Moore
02:16 MrGrumpyDrawers