Comments
Jason Smith analyzes a highly touted Zogby poll of the troops in Iraq wherein 72% want the U.S. to pull out within a year.
Looking inside the numbers, the result doesn’t make much sense. Until you realize that they are simply supporting existing policy.
Well duh. It’s only news in the way that it is spun to paint Iraq as a unwinnable ‘quagmire’.
Conducted by the Center for Peace and Global Studies… Hmmmm. I just wonder how many of those 700+ ‘randomly selected’ respondents were in front line units and how many were on FOBs in support jobs. Because if they wanted to paint a certain picture, all they would have to d ois ask the right people. Of course, they don’t tell us who those people are…
90% of troops thinking the war in Iraq is retaliation does not extend to 90% of them thinking Iraq had a role in 9-11. Theres a big difference.
Hmmm…. you have a point. But it is not very complimentary of our leadership is it?
If they are thinking that Bush led them to retaliate against Iraq for 9/11 even though they know Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 then that would explain why Bush is overwhelmingly despised by the good people in our military.
Most military has been in and out of the Gulf so many times in the last two decades that they know the war started in 1990. Just because the press ignored it for most of a decade, does not mean it was not happening…
Ever heard of MEQ? They surrendered to US 25km NE of Bagdad.
Those were not the only terrorists based in Iraq prior to the fall. The smart ones left via Iran/Syria.
Do y’all read the comments, or just go “ah, it’s Ken” & write something at random?
Text from Zogby:
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.”
Ken asked a reasonable question (& I think it’s pretty clear he thinks the soldiers are being misled, not that they’re dumb).
There’s an alleged fact that is quite remarkable.
And none of you has anything intelligent to say in response?
It’s a shame that OTB’s commenters are so far below the level of its posters.
Anderson, not being capable of information dissemination and critial thinking, you’re NOT a very good lawyer are you? Or, maybe you’re a pretty GOOD lawyer attempting to defend your ‘client’s’ misunderstanding.
Look carefully at Ken’s words:
‘Iraq is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11.’
This is a far cry from Saddam being involved in 9/11.
So you say that they believe the war is to stop Al Qaeda in Iraq. Well, yeah. What’s the problem here other than it going against your belief system?
So it is your assumption that the troops have been ‘mislead’. Or in other words, they are stupid, incapable of deciding for themselves. Thanks for your support.
When are you lefties gonna get over the fact that you’re wrong all the time?
LJD, please display your vaunted reasoning skills in distinguishing the following 2 phrases:
“Saddam’s role in 9/11″
“Saddam’s being involved in 9/11″
If I got up in the sleepiest of sleepy Mississippi trial courts & tried to distinguish these two phrases, as a matter of ordinary usage, the judge would wonder what I’d been smoking.
And in federal court, the judge would probably make me wish I hadn’t gotten out of bed that day.
If you’re going to condescend so, then not looking like an ignoramus yourself is an important first step.
You’re placing too much stock in the wording of the question. Keep in mind this is a poll, and we don’t know how the questions were asked, or who was asked (protected for ‘security reasons’). I’m not willing to spend $19.99 to learn more about it.
There are inherent problems in verbal communication where a question was asked and an answer was recorded. It was not a written question and response as we see here. There is a BIG diffference. It leaves a lot of assumptions about how the respondents received and interpreted the question.
Basically, you’re highlighting the wrong words. Try placing emphaisis on ‘retaliation’. Believing you are retaliating for 9/11, is not cause and effect for Saddam’s involvement in it. To put it more simply, they can belive they are being ordered to retaliate, they can think their Commander in Chief belives Saddam had a role in 9/11, but that does not go to say that they belive Saddam had a role in 9/11.
For f-sake, this is a poll, and a sloppy one at that. Oh yeah, and it was conducted by the LaMoyne Center for Peace and Global Studies. No motives there whatsoever.
