A new Zogby poll shows some interesting facts about our troops.
Le Moyne College/Zogby Poll shows just one in five troops want to heed Bush call to stay “as long as they are needed”
While 58% say mission is clear, 42% say U.S. role is hazy
Plurality believes Iraqi insurgents are mostly homegrown
Almost 90% think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11, most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks
Majority of troops oppose use of harsh prisoner interrogation
Plurality of troops pleased with their armor and equipment
An
overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think
the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one
in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne
College/Zogby International survey shows.
The Saddam and 9/11 numbers are shocking, so let’s looks at them more closely.
While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”
“Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there,” said Pollster John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. “Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein.” Just 24% said that “establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World” was the main or a major reason for the war. Only small percentages see the mission there as securing oil supplies (11%) or to provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%).
Let’s take our own poll and see what we get.
“Almost 90% think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11, most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks”
Does this mean that they think Saddam had something to do with 9/11?
.
with guys in military intelligence right now (there’s a whole new “military intelligence” joke in there) who swear that if the command says so then that’s the way it is and the command still says that Saddam had something to do with 9/11.
if I wanted them to be willing to die over there.
It makes any outrage they feel on returning home more understandable than it already is.
I’m kinda of the opinion that oil supplies and bases go hand in hand. Can I vote twice?
this is one of those forced choice polls.
Hey! You can’t vote…you’re, you’re…<gasp> Canadian <pant>…
and I would have to agree.
Damn push-polls.
Peace
I agree-securing bases and the oil profit$ flow. See this analysis by Prof. Mark LeVine’s in his essay Iraq: The wages of chaos
Oh my. The troops may want out, but we’re in for decades.
I kind of waffled over that choice too, but I think the major reason for wanting permanent bases in the region is in order to secure the oil supplies rather than the other way around.
We went to war(s) because
Frustrated because I had to choose between ‘securing oil’ and ‘creating bases’. I also believe that they were fairly equal in the reasoning.
I am absolutely stunned and amazed that this poll of troops said that:
they still believe Saddam had something to do with 9/11 and Al Quaidah, much less the other stuff.
I’m guessing that even with so many of the original troops being forced to stay longer than their initial posting that most of the people there now signed up after Bush went into Iraq. The original troops didn’t sign up to invade Iraq–but from what I have seen were either responding to 9/11 or trying to obtain money for college.
And I realize to get men and women to enlist and go over there today that they have to feed a line of bullshit to manipulate them———-and I realize that they lowered the standards in education and intelligence to increase enlistments————
but to actually still believe that about Saddam/9-11/Al Quaida is just too bizarre.
I wish I knew more about how the poll was taken, how many units were asked and how the actual questions were worded. (Perhaps they “accidentally” polled the developmentally disabled unit.) I don’t want to believe our troops drank the koolaid that easily. shudder
but I think the real answer is missing: To provide the neo-fascist regime with “patriotic” support to cover the massive transfer of the nation’s wealth to the oligarchy and the accompanying trashing of the Bill of Rights, the checks-and-balances Constitutional system, and democratic elections. Whatever happens now, they achieved their goals with the help of a lot of cowardly Dem co-conspirators. Reversing the damage they’ve done will be like trying to get rid of fire ants.
Source Wikipedia
“The PNAC recommends the forward redeployment of US forces at new strategically placed permanent military bases. Permanent bases ease the strain on US forces, allowing readiness to be maintained and the carrier fleet to be reduced. Furthermore the military should be enlarged, equipped and trained for the peacekeeping role it is increasingly called upon to fulfill. This global police force would have the power to keep law and order around the world in accordance with United States interests. The PNAC also advocates that the United States government should capitalize on its military and economic superiority to gain unchallengeable superiority through all means necessary, including military force.”
.
WASHINGTON (SFGate/AP) – 16 minutes ago — A civil war in Iraq could lead to a broader conflict in the Middle East, pitting the region’s rival Islamic sects against each other, National Intelligence Director John Negroponte said in an unusually frank assessment.
The Negroponte File: Iran-Contra Covert Action“If chaos were to descend upon Iraq or the forces of democracy were to be defeated in that country … this would have implications for the rest of the Middle East region and, indeed, the world,” Negroponte said at a Senate Armed Services Committee hearing on global threats.
“But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.”
▼ ▼ ▼ MY DIARY