Posted on 06/14/2005 1:37:41 PM PDT by phoenix_004
Many adults in the United States believe their government should begin to implement an exit strategy in Iraq, according to a poll by Gallup released by CNN and USA Today. 59 per cent of respondents believe the U.S. should withdraw some or all troops from Iraq, a 10 per cent increase since February.
The coalition effort against Saddam Husseins regime was launched in March 2003. At least 1,700 American soldiers have died during the military operation, and more than 12,800 troops have been injured. 56 per cent of respondents believe the war was not worth it.
Iraqi voters elected a transitional legislative branch in January. On May 3, the new administration headed by prime minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari was sworn in. Since the new government was announced on Apr. 28, more than 900 people have been killed in a variety of attacks.
On Jun. 7, U.S. president George W. Bush outlined his strategy on Iraq, saying, "Were training Iraqi forces so they can take the fight to the enemy, so they can defend their country. And then our troops will come home with the honour they have earned." 56 per cent of respondents say they would be upset if Bush decides to send more troops to Iraq, a 16 per cent increase since September.
Polling Data
Which comes closest to your view about what the U.S. should now do about the number of U.S. troops in Iraq: the U.S. should send more troops to Iraq, the U.S. should keep the number of troops as it is now, the U.S. should withdraw some troops from Iraq, or the U.S. should withdraw all of its troops from Iraq?
(Excerpt) Read more at angus-reid.com ...
NO!
Well, anyone (with a sound mind) after reading their poll, wouldn't want to hire this outfit for strategic advice because they have shown here that they can't do the job. LOL!!
THE SPINNING OF GALLUP'S SURVEY ON IRAQ:
According to a 6/8/05 Gallup poll, the respondents surveyed offered the following opinions concerning our troop levels in Iraq:
10% send more
26% keep the same
31% withdraw some
28% withdraw all
In typical agenda-driven fashion, the leftist MSM chose to add those who answered 'withdraw some' to those who responded 'withdraw all' so that they could BOGUSLY report that 59% of the American people want our troops out of Iraq . . . NONSENSE!
An objective MSM would have noted that 67% of the American public want to maintain our presence in Iraq, with a plurality within this percentage also wanting to begin the 'draw down' process -- A POSITION, BY THE WAY, THAT JUST HAPPENS TO REFLECT THE PRESIDENT'S OFFICIAL POSTURE RELATIVE TO THIS ISSUE!!!
BTW: IBD/TIPP's new poll offers CONVERSE results:
http://www.investors.com/editorial/issues02.asp?v=6/14
NEVER BELIEVE THE MSM'S 'SPIN' OF ANY POLL . . . THEY HAVE BUT ONE OBJECTIVE: DESTROY REPUBLICANS AND EMPOWER DEMOCRATS!!
And meanwhile, since the administration has not communicated specific measurable goals, and has done a piss-poor job of informing the public of the progress towards those goals, Americans are left to wonder what progress is actually being made. So, what progress is being made? I don't mean sidebar human interest stories. I mean progress towards our goal. How is it even being measured? How are we supposed to evaluate our progress? Oh, I forgot. GWB is infallible and we should just sit back and wave the flag.
That of course, meant nothing to me.
Gub'mint by poll, what could be more democratic?
Imagine asking FDR in 1942 how much its going to cost, and how long are we going to be over there...
The answer then, as now, is that its unknowable. It depends in part on the enemy. How long will it be before the enemy sees this fight as hopeless, unwinnable, and gives it up? An important piece of this puzzle is the perception the enemy has of our resolve. If he sees us waver every time we take a hit, then hope for him is still alive, and the fight continues.
I would say that the time table is tied to the Iraqi government's ability to defend itself, and there are probably still a couple of names from the "deck of cards" that we want to take down before we declare victory. Those two are probably the bottom line issues, and how that relates to a calendar is probably irrelevant.
Beyond that, my guess is that we aren't leaving until Syria has been pushed into holding elections. So my guess is we're there for another five years.
Isn't it obvious to you? Goals are to have the Iraqi's self-supporting, and the end of the bombings, kidnappings, attacks, etc.
Excellent Post, Doc!
Congressman Billybob
That is the pivotal issue of the world today.
How can anyone solve a problem without identifying its root cause and then attacking that cause? How can we win a war without identifying the frikken enemy, understanding its weaknesses and attacking those weaknesses?
Quite frankly, our approach is "insane"...if we define insanity, in this case, as "an irrational response to a serious and life threatening problem."
In another respect it is that simple. The democrats could have picked a candidate that told us what he would do if elected and instead picked a candidate who told us he would not be Bush. (And he is still saying that.) Your complaint should be directed at the opposition party. And I see that it is. But to go farther, now that we think Bush is making some mistake of some kind we should tell him what to do?
As far as support for Bush and the war. I do support him. I think he has missed the boat as far as illegal immigration, but that is not the war with international terror organizations (except that it is a way for them to gain entry although most can get here easily with any number of approaches) most of which are driven by religious fanaticism. My point is that asking a bunch of randomly selected Americans what they think is a very bad idea from the standpoint of policy. Yes, we elected him, and have a right and duty to petition him with any disagreement we wish. But in the final analysis, I don't think the average American on the streets knows what century we are in much less what the administration in DC should do with our troops. I wish the armchair quarterbacks would sign up, advance to the decision making rank of officer in some service and then start making suggestions. (And no, while I worked in sensitive areas of defense, I don't know enough myself to tell the president what to do. I probably would be more agressive than he is, but thats just me.)
You raise a good point. That is why the military [draftees included] had to serve for 'the duration' plus 6 months. The metric was unconditional surrender.
Yes, but this isn't a Chuck Berry thread.
The Left wants to open a Second Front, in your local mall...
Thank you.
I heard Nancy Regan's son "Ron" blathering, today, about this poll. My disgust with Nancy's son know no bounds!
That should bring ya up to speed a little.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.