Gallup: 55% Now Back U.S. Pullout from Iraq Within a Year

Editor & Publisher ^ | 08/03/2006 | E&P Staff

[LM_Guy]

NEW YORK A new Gallup poll released today revealed another upward bump in the number of Amercians who now want a complete U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq in the next 12 months.

That number now stands at 55%, with 19% supporting immediate withdrawal and another 36% wanting it done by August 2007.

"While the percentage of Americans who favor a withdrawal of all U.S. troops either now or within a year is not a supermajority, it is a majority, suggesting that the Democratic leadership is speaking to an issue that resonates with many Americans," Frank Newport, director of the Gallup Poll, writes today.

Another majority, 54%, now say that the U.S. invasion in 2003 was a "mistake."

The partisan divided remains wide on the withdrawal question, with 77% of Democrats wanting U.S. troops out in a year and only 28% of Republicans. Independents back a 12-month pullout at 56%.

Gallup polled 1,002 adult Americans at the very end of July.

[HIDEK6]

That number now stands at 55%,

Are there that many people not paying attention?

[Jameison]

"If you think past wars between nation-states are an appropriate comparison for what we are doing in Iraq"

Ummm.. Iraq is a nation state.

"then I'm sorry I responded to your post at all, because your opinion can simply be dismissed out of hand. "

Your "opinion",or what can more accurately be described as the loony left, moonbat "opinion, consists of :"I hate Bush, and am against any war that Bush started."
Meanwhile the self same moonbats like you, didn't even make a squeak when BJ Klinton attaccked Serbia in Koosova, ,with no UN Mandate or even authorization by congress.
We call that Bush Derangement Syndrome.
Its a serious disease.
Go get treatment.
You need help.


"By the way, the wars you mention were ended by formal surrender, with the exception of the formal armistice in WWI."

Saddam's generals have already formally surrounded when our excellent troops swiftly took over that country.
The terrorists are simply going to continue dying till they find more productive ways of making a living.
# 2, America has fought and won plenty of wars where there was no formal surrender.
Our wars in Cuba, Granada, Panama, Bosnia, Kosovo, even Mexico come to mind


"Do you really think that's how this one is going to end?"

Read the above sucker.

[lugsoul]

So, since your original analogy is clearly inapplicable, you now have to try to find different ones.

Are you capable of responding without ascribing positions to me which I haven't stated? Are you so weak that you can't respond without building a straw man? You made a statement about 'when we have won,' I asked you to flesh that out, and you reply with some inanity about prior wars against nation-states - and now you seem to be trying to contend that we are trying to conquer Iraq, rather than prop it up. Do you even have the slightest idea what is happening over there? Despite your ravings, we aren't trying to take the country down. We took the government down three years ago. Do you really believe we are 'at war' with the nation of Iraq right now?

I'm certain your reply will (a) ascribe positions to me made up in your own delusional mind and (b) consist of non-sequitur after non-sequitur, so don't bother. You clearly cannot describe what 'when we have won' looks like, so your prior statement is simply a facade.

[Jameison]

"So, since your original analogy is clearly inapplicable, you now have to try to find different ones"

My original analogy stands.
I brought in new ones to reply to your latest attempt to weasel and wiggle out of what you said before.


"Are you capable of responding without ascribing positions to me which I haven't stated?"

Read my post # 62.
Every reply there was preceded by a direct quote from your post # 60.


"Are you so weak that you can't respond without building a straw man?"

You should be asking yourself that question sucker.
Every argument you have put forward is a straw man's argument.
I have systematically taken apart your weak pathetic "points" one by one, and left you floundering and foaming at the mouth.

"You made a statement about 'when we have won,' I asked you to flesh that out, and you reply with some inanity about prior wars against nation-states - and now you seem to be trying to contend that we are trying to conquer Iraq, rather than prop it up"

You asked a question about what "when we have won" means, I retorted by asking you exactly what is it is about "what we have won" is hard to understand, and you have been moving in circles like a beheaded chicken since, having been hammered by me at every turn.
Your latest pathetic attempt at a reply simply neglecting completely every single point I hit you with in my previous post and instead starting out on a long, confused, rumbling, loony left, insane rant.



"Do you even have the slightest idea what is happening over there? "

I do.
Do you?
I know that most of the country, including Kurdistan is very peaceful, and more prosperous than they have been for a very long time.
I think you'd better better read upon what is actually happening in Iraq behind the Kool Aid the drive-by media keep feeding ya.


"Despite your ravings, we aren't trying to take the country down"

America is not trying to take the Iraqi government down?
Ummm..we helped create the current democratically elected Iraqi government, how can we be trying to take it down?


"We took the government down three years ago"

Bingo.
You finally realized that did you?

" Do you really believe we are 'at war' with the nation of Iraq right now? "

Umm..who said that, fool?



"I'm certain your reply will (a) ascribe positions to me made up in your own delusional mind and (b) consist of non-sequitur after non-sequitur, so don't bother. You clearly cannot describe what 'when we have won' looks like, so your prior statement is simply a facade."

Read up.
Every reply from me has preceded by a direct quote from your previous posts..
And if you read the reply before this one, you'll see that its you that is busty ascribing positions tome that I have never even com,e close to making.
Meanwhile your entire insane diatribe in your post , does not contain even one direct reply to any quote from me, resorting instead on what the loony left, moonbats of America like you do; which is bait and switch, and make up bogey men in order to fight them.

I would strongly suggest you go back to your fellow psychotic losers at DU/Kos where they will buy the garbage you are selling...for your own good, and to save you further embarrassment.
We are too knowledgeable to buy your garbage.
What an idiot!

[wardaddy]

Americans are sure sorta stupid

[lugsoul]

Sad, and weak, your replies are.

Despite your pitiful rants and your empty boasts, you still haven't even made a single stride in the direction of an answer to the question I first asked. Because you don't know the answer. You don't have the slightest idea what "when we have won" means.

Your assessment of the current state of things is quite different from that of our own generals. I believe them over you. But I didn't ask you about the present. I asked you about the future - what does 'when we have won' look like. And about the best you've been able to do is some scenario like a battleship steaming up the Tigris for a formal surrender ceremony. Since everyone on the planet except you knows that isn't going to happen, it seems settled that you don't have a scintilla of an idea what you are talking about.

Oh, and I'll decline your invitation to leave.

And, as for this: Umm..who said that, fool?

You should try reading your own posts - you did. I said that what we are doing in Iraq isn't comparable to the past wars against nation-states you use as your examples - and your direct reply was 'Iraq is a nation-state.' If you weren't trying to say that we are at war with Iraq, then you need some help with the basics of the language.

[Jameison]

"Sad, and weak, your replies are"

Said the guy who invented sad weak, pathetic replies.

"you still haven't even made a single stride in the direction of an answer to the question I first asked"

You haven't been able to make a single point since your original moonbat, anti-Bush post, which in itself was easily taken apart by Freepers with little effort.
You have been floundering like a headless chicken since.

[Jameison]

"Your assessment of the current state of things is quite different from that of our own generals"

How many Generals have you spoken to again?
And how many of them generals have disputed the fact that as a matter of fact, most of Iraq, including nearly all of Kurdistan, is very peaceful, and enjoying great economic boom, with record car ownership, TV ownership, cell phone ownership, the best health care they have had in decades, new schools rebuilt, new roads, bridges etc.
Even Fallujah,, which used to be a nasty terrorist hellhole is now own of the quietest, , safest places on the planet, certainly much safer than New York.

Do we have violence in Baghdad? Yes.
Does it mean we have violence's everywhere in Iraq? Nope.
It's like saying we have very high murder rates in New York City (nearly 600 last year alone) and Detroit, so therefore, the murder rate in Huntsville , Alabama is high as well.

Next?

[Jameison]

"Oh, and I'll decline your invitation to leave. "

Be my guest.
I am just getting warmed up.
Its going to be hammer a troll day.
What fun.

[Jameison]

"I said that what we are doing in Iraq isn't comparable to the past wars against nation-states you use as your examples - and your direct reply was 'Iraq is a nation-state.'

Iraq IS nation state.


"If you weren't trying to say that we are at war with Iraq,"

Easy.
America have ALREADY fought and defeated the Iraq nation state, in one of the most famous military victories ever.
To day, America is fighting Al Quaeda terrorists like Zarqawi, who our Airforce cheerfully obliged by sending him to Allah.
No 2 wars are exactly alike.
One thing is certain, the terrorists are going to lose.
Where is the intifida that seemed so unstoppable a few years back, today?
And where are the rabid, murderous, islamofacist terrorists that help Algeria to ransom for over 10 years today?

[over3Owithabrain]

Call me a pessimist, but when I see "news" like this I almost believe we will never win a war again. As long as Dummies have control over the media, they wont allow it. The sheeple will listen to Katie, the NYT and Shrillary and believe what they are told.

To an extent I agree with your sentiments, but I give part of the blame to the administration for holding back in this war initially and being too "PC" about certain aspects.

I really think most Americans would have supported a swift and thorough annihilation (yes with large civilian casualties) despite what the left and the media would have said at the time.

You don't beat these crazy Islams with limited attacks, occupation, and changing hearts and minds. You thoroughly dominate and destroy them. Bush and his advisors decided not to stomach that.

The majority of Americans rally around their country and flag. They just don't have the patience for a slow, plodding, drawn out effort with limited and sporadic successes. Thus their support wanes and the leftist media wears them down.

[lugsoul]

I've been here a lot longer than you, newbie. A troll, I am not.

[lugsoul]

Hey, straw man builder - can you quote the 'anti-Bush' comment you keep raving like a lunatic about? I don't think you can - because I didn't say any such thing. You are just a liar. And not even a very good one. All hyperbole and ad hominem, but unable to answer a simple question about your own post.

[Jameison]

"Hey, straw man builder - can you quote the 'anti-Bush' comment you keep raving like a lunatic about? "

Hey, sucker, the "we can't possibly win in Iraq"is the favorite tactic of the BDS (Bush Derangement Syndrome) sufferers. You are classic case of that disease.
You have been a John Murtha clone on this thread since you started posting.

[Jameison]

"I've been here a lot longer than you, newbie"

A sleeper agent and 5th columnist from DU/Kos/moveon?



"A troll, I am not"

If it walks like a duck...

[lugsoul]

Still making up quotes to attribute to me? You are a shameless liar, because I haven't said anything of the sort.

I didn't make any comment in my initial post. I asked you a simple question about your post. One you still can't answer.

[lugsoul]

Are you so ill-equipped that you must resort simply to ad hominem? You make up positions out of thin air to ascribe to me, resort to namecalling, and still haven't even made the barest statement of what 'when we have won' means. It is clear that you can merely repeat soundbites without substance.

[Jameison]

"Still making up quotes to attribute to me? "

Sill quoting you before replying to your nonsense.


"You are a shameless liar, because I haven't said anything of the sort. "

Hah Hah!
Ruining away from your own garbage are you?


"I didn't make any comment in my initial post"

You have made plenty of comments since then, all of which I have proceeded to demolish with ease.


" I asked you a simple question about your post. One you still can't answer."

Been answered long ago.
It's not my fault if you are illiterate as well as retarded is it?

[Jameison]

"Are you so ill-equipped that you must resort simply to ad hominem?"

Naaah.
Just of an order of magnitude above your puny mind, that's all.


"You make up positions out of thin air to ascribe to me, resort to namecalling, "

Every reply to you has been preceeded by direct quotes from you.
On the other hand, your attempts slither and wiggle from your unsustaninalble positions is not working.

"It is clear that you can merely repeat soundbites without substance."

Look who's talking.
Get back to me when you have anything worthwhile to say will you? In the meantime I will simply continue to toy with your inane, moronic posts. It's a lot of fun.

[mewzilla]

Can you briefly state - hopefully with concrete, on-the-ground realities rather than flowery phrases - what 'when we have won' means?

When Iraq can fend for itself.