Poll: Most believe U.S. won't win war [USAToday/CNN/Gallup]

[grytpype]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-07-26-poll-us-not-winning-iraq_x.htm

Poll: Most believe U.S. won't win war
By Susan Page, USA TODAY
WASHINGTON — Most Americans don't believe the United States will succeed in winning the war in Iraq or establishing a stable democracy there, according to a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll.

...

• For the first time, a majority of Americans, 51%, say the Bush administration deliberately misled the public about whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction — the central justification given for invading. The administration's credibility on the issue has been steadily eroding since 2003 after stores of the weapons weren't found.

• By 58%-37%, a majority say the United States won't be able to establish a stable democratic government in Iraq, similar to the results when the question was asked in April 2004.

• About one-third, 32%, say the United States can't win the war in Iraq. Another 21% say the United States could win the war, but they don't think it will. Just 43% predict a victory.

Still, on the question designed to test fundamental attitudes toward the war — was it a mistake to send U.S. troops? — the public's view has rebounded. By 53%-46%, those surveyed say it wasn't a mistake, the strongest support for the war since just after the Iraqi elections in January.

[samsingh]

1. the public thinks it wasn't a mistake?

what was it then?

[grytpype]

2. Yeah, that's hard to figure out...

The article says this was the highest "not a mistake" since the "elections" in January.

Probably some "Dear Leader is infallible even though everything he does goes horribly wrong" at work there.

[ClintonTyree]

5. But they think bush lied...............

and it's not winnable. But it wasn't a mistake? :wtf:

I'm with you, these questions, or rather these answers, are all fucked up. They make no sense, just like the bush administration.

[Emendator]

34. There's no point

in getting bent out of shape because of weird poll results, which are temporary snapshots. The Democrats should be doing two things. Coming up with an exit plan and also a means of transferring the occupation to the UN, something along the lines of what Juan Cole writes about. If we (meaning the US) tried hard enough, we could probably get a UN team in there with most of the troops from Muslim countries, who would be less apt to alienate the bulk of the population. Then our troops could come home and maybe Iraq would have a better chance of staying together. We need to emphasize that our troops could come home. But I don't see the Democrats doing this.

Doing those things will be seen by the American people as trying to come up with a constructive solution. Doing that will bear fruit, if not in 2006, but probably in 2008. Because if things stay as they are currently, by 2008, the poll numbers won't be ambiguous and self-contradictory. The people will be angry at Bush and the Republicans and they will be looking for people with a plan. If the Democrats don't come up with a plan, then they leave themselves open to losing to someone like Hagel, an antiwar Republican, who would have a good chance of getting the nomination at that point. Wouldn't that be a hoot?

So forget about Bush. In the short run, he and the neocons got away with lying us into a war. In the long run, they won't get away with it. If anything comes of the Valerie Plame scandal, then so be it. But don't put too much hope in it. It's a vague and complicated scandal that the public will only care about if there is something really big.

[Patchuli]

46. L'Affaire Plame is not vague as to the fact

that it compromised national security! This won't go away and I can see treason indictments, among others. Plame and Rove, Libby, etc. are the tip of the iceberg. Outing a CIA front company is treason. Not to mention, there is a link between Downing Street Memos and Plame as well. This is "something really big!" How high did this outing go anyway. It's hard for me to swallow that Cheney and Bush didn't know about it.

I would tend to worry less about polls and more about making sure elections are honest!!

[Emendator]

48. You're right

about the Plame controversy and it is important. But that's not something that Democrats are responsible for. It's the result of Republican errors, a gift. If it damages Bush, all fine and good. If it brings him down, even better. But don't bet on it. Bush still has Congress to back him up.

If the Republican candidate in 2008 is someone without any taint to Bush or the fallout from the Plame scandal, then it won't hurt them if the Democrats don't have a good plan for getting out of Iraq and transferring it to the UN.

The Democrats just don't resonate with the American people anymore. If a Republican candidate as weakened as Bush was in 2004 wins by a bigger margin than he did in 2000, then the Democrats have a serious problem. If there had been no Iraq war, the economy would have been even better and Bush would have won in a landslide. Harping on fantasies about stolen elections will get Democrats nowhere.

[Patchuli]

49. I don't believe the election theft was a "fantasy"

Diebold's CEO was "committed to delivering the State of Ohio's votes to George W. Bush" and he did, didn't he? With of course the totally partisan help of Kenneth Blackwell and the rest of the crooks. As to 2000, Gore won. Because the Supreme Court ruled wrongly doesn't change that fact either.

Until we have paper ballots hand-counted, Republicans will try to cheat.

I also disagree with you regarding Democrats resonating with the American people. That's changing more and more daily the more crud that slimes out of the Republican party.

[Emendator]

85. It doesn't matter

if you think the election was stolen. The public isn't going to believe it unless you can give them some really rock solid evidence. Too many people would need to be involved with such a plot. I'm extremely skeptical.

I'm also skeptical that the American people are coming around to the Democrats. When people think that, they tend to be wrong. Everyone wants to be vindicated. 2008 will have a different Republican candidate, who will be free from the taint of Bush. It's not going to be easy by any means.

[converted_democrat]

89. I don't think you know what your talking about.......

It would only take 4 or 5 people in Ohio and in Florida to throw the election. That is hardly a vast conspiracy.

[converted_democrat]

80. The election being stolen isn't a fantasy.

If you understand basic math and statistics, than you would realize that the in all probability the election was stolen. It's hardly a fantasy.

[Emendator]

86. Go convince the public

if you can. Don't get upset with me.

[converted_democrat]

87. This isn't about the public, YOU called it a fantasy.

You asserted that it was a fantasy, which just perpetuates the bullshit, and confusion. Public misinformation is a big problem, and your not helping matters at all.

[Sparkman]

81. WHAT!!! Bush had no mandate IN WARTIME!! unheard of, wars win elections

You've got to factor in the cheating AND the warbird stature of chimp.
The fact that Kerry was a nice guy, against much better funding, and still made a close race (voters) is phenomenal. AND, since Dems are a diverse, grass roots coalition of not only poor but liberal (non-corporate linked) as well as a few non-Repub corporate types means that
1) yes it's harder to congeal the party
2) many Dems are disenfranchised (itinerants, felons, unemployed)
3) The MSM lets the crimes of the Repub go under reported, as instructed.
whatdaya say, emandater, can we hear a woaaaaa team!

[Emendator]

88. Excuses

for losing. No one cares about excuses. They only care about results.

The reality is that the public has been 50-50 about the war, even last November. 9/11 helped Bush. Iraq didn't. Bush was constantly on the defensive about it. That's why the Republicans wanted to switch the topic to the swift boat vets, to take away Kerry's record.

Kerry never portrayed himself as the antiwar candidate. He promised to fight the war better. So the public saw no difference in terms of foreign policy. And then when he went off on his fiscal responsibility nonsense, he was a dead duck.

If there hadn't been an Iraq war, Bush would have won in a landslide. Only successful wars help presidents. Not neverending ones. Ask LBJ and Nixon.

[Sparkman]

91. IRAQ invaded Mar'03, didn't look non-ending war in Nov.04, but in 06/08!

Now were talking anti-war plank intesnsive electioneering.
I agree Kerry could have gone anit-war, denying a few green votes.
BUT the crappy economy and the preppy lifeless mispeak king, smirking chimp could easily have lost to a moderate Dem.
Don't forget, friend, excuses are really monday night quarterbacking, the key to any successful team. And with Repubs abusing civil liberties like a mother superior, the nation may run to the dems like a catholic girl to the bad boy.
Can we get a yeaaa team now, emandator?

[Emendator]

92. Yeah team

Happy?

2004 was a real wake up call. We had a weakened president who should have lost but won by a bigger margin. And Bush would have won pretty big if he didn't go into Iraq. If the Democrats can't win under those circumstances, something is seriously wrong. It gets me to thinking that people like Jude Wanniski is right. Time has passed them by. It's evolve or die time and I don't see enough flexibility here.

Whatever gains the Democrats get, if any, are going to be temporary because they will be the result of Republican mistakes - addition by subtraction.

[Patchuli]

93. Not to be mean,

but I think Free Republic needs you.

[Emendator]

94. lol

Maybe you're right. But I don't want to get rabies.

[Zhade]

95. Well, a lie isn't a mistake, right?

Kind of a misleading poll, IMHO.

[Rex_Goodheart]

7. Americans are fucking stupid.

I hate to say it, but most of Americans are.

Most Americans think we won't win this war, but that it wasn't a mistake. It shows you how utterly stupid about war Americans are.

We're beating our heads against the wall trying to make this Administration accountable... our fellow Americans are dolts.

[grytpype]

9. Hey, look on the bright side.

A majority is finally waking up to the fact that Bush lied us into this war and he can't win it and can't pull us out.

It's only a matter of time before it finally sinks in that Bush fucked up.

[cliss]

28. PAIN, my friend.

Pain is the one thing that will rouse them out of their slumber.

I hate to say it, and it shouldn't be so. But it is. People are typically re-active, rather than pro-active. They'll wait until they're poked by an electric cattle prod.

So -- they'll wake up. It'll be late, but hopefully not as late as with VietNam.

[anarchy1999]

40. Nuff said!

Only way out is fear of loss.
No amount of polling or Democrats will get us out of this until more people really start wailing.

[AlwaysQuestion]

51. Absolutely!!

You've nailed it--unfortunately!

I think the vast majority of people in the west are uncaring, unwitting dupes. I'm doing okay Jack. End story. We are not nations hell bent on prevention. That means the vast majority are also stupid. Spending fewer bucks preventing something potentially destructive they eschew cuz they CAN'T see, taste, smell, or touch problem saving solutions. Thinking and planning ahead is just simply a no-go.

Why they have such a disconnect is puzzling to me. If they conducted their own lives only by reacting they'd never make any advances in their lives. Yet, when it comes to national and international matters, they fail to see the connect between personal and general. Unfortunately, this disconnect costs them and us trillions in any number of areas: Health, pre-school care, education, criminal system. Reactive measures are horrendously costly and we invariably end up with only stop-gap measures, and certainly it provides no advancement for the better good of society at large. It is sheer madness. You, me, and so many others here "get it." One has to ask the question, why? Where did we go right and where did they go wrong? We're all exposed to much the same things but our conclusions about what we observe are just so different from those on the right. Why is that?

[marmar]

12. Americans are really fucking stupid about war...

It makes you want to send a Howard Zinn book out to everybody in this country.

[AlwaysQuestion]

53. Sorry!

Not enough. You would need to hand them a copy, then invite yourself in, turn off their t.v. and/or power down their video games; plunk 'em down on their well worn chesterfields, and bloody well read the material to them. Mailing them a copy?! Whatever were you thinking. Major mistake, giving them credit for the ability to self-educate on matters that could help society as a whole.

Then, even with someone present to keep them focused, would they absorb the material sufficiently enough to be able to formulate questions and to engage in meaningful dialogue? Ya see, lots of area to cover.

Your suggestion is tops for as far as it goes. Unfortunately, your target audience is inherently too inept to initiate much on their own. Hand-holding is essential--sorry to say.

[marmar]

67. LOL! Good point...

If they got them in the mail, they'd end up in the waste basket or as a coaster for their biggie-sized cola!

:silly:

[AlwaysQuestion]

71. Yeah, but as I said, you're on the right track

We just gotta take it several steps further! And that's the truth!:grr:

[noamnety]

17. and even stupider

The concept of a third party winning a civil war in another country.

[reprobate]

42. As "Duke" Wayne said: "Life is hard, and it's harder if you're stupid."

[Sparkman]

84. God must love "less than smart" people--he made so many of them.

I was at the hamburger stand, when the girl said, "I have a degree in liberal arts, want fries with that?"
Our job outsourcing doesn't instill confidence in higher education, when a grad can't even get a decent job!!

[Massacure]

98. The only mistake was not tossing Saddam on his ass in 91.

General Shinseki estimated we would need several hundred thousand soldiers. But a certain someone fired him for being "wildly off the mark" and went in with 150,000 instead. Now the weapons depots have been looted and the place is a huge powderkeg. The operation was doomed from the start.

Saddam should have been gone after Desert Storm when we had half a million mutlinational forces in Iraq. The Europeans are probably better at peacekeeping than the U.S. is anyways.

[GOTV]

100. Be careful with statistics

These kinds of things come up all the time where it looks like a majority (or large pluralty) hold obvious conflicting beliefs.

In this case 53% say it was not a mistake to invade Iraq while 57% think we probably won't win.

Since 43% think we will win the war, it might be that all of them also believe that the war was not a mistake.

That would mean that only 10% think it was not a mistake to go into a war we won't win. They wouldn't be the bright 10% imo.

[EVDebs]

19. The media says "We" elected him, the media won't admit a mistake

especially if it was a clusterfarkel !

[Xipe Totec]

21. Cognitive Dissonance

People must find some way to explain away events, that does not require them to admit personal responsibility.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

25. Explain away events......and votes.

"If Chimp was wrong and I voted for Chimp..."

[AlwaysQuestion]

56. Why must they?

Give us your take - perhaps there're some solutions in the explanation

[Xipe Totec]

68. It's not a 'they' issue, it's human nature.

if someone is called upon to learn something which contradicts what they already think they know — particularly if they are committed to that prior knowledge — they are likely to resist the new learning. Even Carl Rogers recognised this. Accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation, in Piaget's terms.

and—counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been "had", or "conned".

http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm

(edit)

This is a more in depth treatise:

Personal Responsibility for Bad Outcomes

As a predictor of dissonance, Aronson’s fear of looking foolish proved better than Festinger’s logical inconsistency. But it remained for University of Texas researcher Robert Wicklund and his colleague from the University of Kansas, Jack Brehm, to establish the definitive conditions under which counterattitudinal advocacy leads to change in conviction. They determined that personal responsibility for undesirable consequences is the ultimate cause of dissonance. Wicklund and Brehm also showed that this sense of accountability comes only when we foresee problems looming on the horizon yet choose to keep going in the same direction.


http://www.afirstlook.com/archive/cogdiss.cfm?source=archther

[AlwaysQuestion]

72. Thanks!

I've taken a cursory glance at what you've provided. You may sure that I'll read through this interesting material later on this evening when I have the time to concentrate.

Until then, I'll zip my lip and get on with the day's activities. Cheers.

[barb162]

44. Maybe some still think there is deeply buried WMD there

but it is really, really deep

[wookie294]

50. I think Americans say: "It wasn't a mistake to help Iraqis"

I think most Americans (not me) think we did the "noble" thing in attempting to help the Iraqi people. That's why a majority think it "wasn't a mistake" to send troops to Iraq. But this kind of sentiment does NOT indicate Americans support our involvement in Iraq beyond another 12 months. I think USA Today was incorrect to say the number represents a "fundamental attitude" on the war. There's nothing "fundamental" about it.

[GCP]

66. It's called cognitive dissonance

The effort to make a prior decision seem like the correct one even when evidence is piling up to the contrary - otherwise one's head is likely to blow up.

"The more well-known form of dissonance, however, is post-decisional dissonance. Many studies have shown that people with compulsive disorders like gambling will subjectively reinforce decisions or commitments they have already made. In one simple experiment, experimenters found that bettors at a horse track believed bets were more likely to succeed immediately after being placed. According to the hypothesis, the possibility of being wrong is dissonance-arousing, so people will change their perceptions to make their decisions seem better.

Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

[damntexdem]

90. Of course it wasn't a "mistake":

it was a premeditated crime.

[enigmatic]

3. This is crazy

The Public believe that W lied us into a war, that we wonm't win, but it wasn't a mistake to send troops there?

[Patty Diana]

24. AOL Poll Majority call Jane Fonda a Traitor___who does all these polls

What's your reaction to Fonda speaking out?
She's a traitor 51%
I don't care what she says 28%
She's a patriot 20%
How seriously do you take Fonda?
Not at all 72%
Very 16%
Somewhat 12%
Total Votes: 406,850
Note on Poll Results
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20050725091609990026&ncid=NWS00010000000001

[Frederik]

4. This is weird

A majority now realizes they were misled, yet a majority believes the war was justified again! I don't get it.

[AlwaysQuestion]

54. Doesn't it stagger the mind JUST!!

And isn't their stupidity more than a thinking brain can take? Do hope we don't end up enraging ourselves right into the looney bin.

[jobycom]

6. Did they ask waht "win"meant? because Bush didn't.

[grytpype]

8. True...

To Bush, "win" meant we roll our tanks into downtown Bagdhad and the grateful Iraqis hand over their country to us.

When that didn't happen, there was no Plan B.

[stillcool]

10. was it a mistake to send US troops?

maybe they didn't ask where? Afghanistan?

[IA_Seth]

11. OK...

So we weren't justified, we won't succeed in our stated goals, and we won't win the military conflict....

But we were right to go in? What in tarnation are the people who answered this survey smokin?

Baaaa

Baaaa

[KoKo]

13. Susan Page .....USA Today............Nuff said........n/t

[startingnow]

14. People

People will admit it was wrong and blah, blah, blah, but they won't admit that they were lied to. They cover all bases. They spin it for themselves. That's why this administration and the rethugs have gotten away with murder! People don't want to believe that they were taken for a ride because-- what would that say about them? People are afraid to believe their government is corrupt and evil because they feel powerless to do anything about it. They feel better off keeping their heads buried in the sand, because if they didn't, why get up in the morning? I also think people believe that the end is near anyway. With the bar being set so low, anyone can do anything they want. People have gotten used to being fearful.

[sojourner]

15. When will we realize that this is all based on non-rational processes?

So it's not a problem to be in a war based on lies, that we can't win, because there are terrorists out there goddammit and we should fight them over there (no matter where "there" is) so we don't have to fight them over here.

Never mind how much these things contradict good common sense. They've bought into the war on terror. No matter what else there is, the misadministration has succeeded in getting that fear embedded in their consciousness that they can justify anything/everything in the name of DOING something to diminish the fear.

Ever watch a person who had to go through a million rituals to feel safe? Do any of those rituals make any sense? Not usually. But it makes them feel safe. That's all that matters.

[Miss Chybil]

97. I think you have something there. I really do. nt

[reverendpatrick]

16. C'mon, people... Think!

"It wasn't a mistake" because Saddam was a bad man. Torture rooms. Gassing his own people. You that kind of stuff!

(I know, I know - We sold him the gas and now we're torturing people in those rooms...)

It all makes perfect sense to the Upside-Down People.

[wookie294]

52. You're exactly right

You pinned it! It REALLY is that simple! That's how Americans think! Americans say: "The war was not a mistake because Saddam was a bad man." LOL. One problem though -- his "rape rooms" have been replaced by American rape rooms where little boys are fucked in the ass by American soldiers. Mission UnderAccomplished.

[AlwaysQuestion]

55. Sooooo

What's your solution for getting em right side up? Is there a solution or is everyone here merely spinning wheels.

[wookie294]

57. Perhaps YOU have the answer

My solution to this problem is to break-up the media oligopoly. As fewer corporations own the media, fewer dissenters will appear as guests on talk shows. Thirty years ago, something like 90 percent of media was owned by 90 corporations. Today, less than 7 corporations own 90 percent of media. That's a travesty. This travesty helped Bush succeed in lying to the American public about weapons of mass destruction since dissenters were ostracized. Fewer media owners means fewer dissenting opinions which means SAY GOODBYE to America forever.

[AlwaysQuestion]

60. Me?

To your direct question - Hell, I wish!!

Yes, I agree, the media plays an extraordinarily important role, mainly because it is they who tell the people what to think. Your idea is on the mark--of course. But how do we accomplish this? What strategies could we use to effect your solution. Keep thinking and in the meantime, I'll keep cogitating on the matter perchance to come up with a nugget. Just don't be holding your breath though!

[reverendpatrick]

99. That's it...

The solution is to kill Corporate Personhood.
The first step to doing that is to LOUDY stop buying their stuff.
No profits? They'll change their tune real fast!
This war is a war for profits, and as long as "we" keep giving it to them, nothing will change...

[4_Legs_Good]

18. Now that's what I call Fuzzy Math!

51% think George Jr. lied us into the war.
58% think we're going to lose (inability to establish a government)

and still 53% think it wasn't a mistake???

WTF was the point if we lose, it was a lie, it costs us $3/4T, 2,000 American servicemen and women and 100,000 Iraqis?

:boggle:

david

[Rainscents]

20. Take a look at who is doing the poll??? USA/CNN/Gallup....

This is Republican poll. Nothing to see... move alone!:grr: :grr: :grr: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

[reprobate]

41. Dead bang on! Now they even spin polls. Don't believe them..ever.

[dhinojosa]

22. BUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH ALL THESE RIBBONS!!!!!

Oh man, what about the ribbon market!?!??!??! They guilted us for so long and they look so nice on our gas guzzling SUVs which endanger our troops even further! Please people, don't give up on this war!!!!!!!!

'Evil fucking :sarcasm:'

[necso]

23. For them to come to terms with reality,

you must consider what (many) people would have to go through:
1) Throw out much of the crap wedged in their heads.
2) Overcome emotions, susceptibility to marketing (etc) and take a detached, rational (etc) viewpoint.
3) Cut through all the nonsense, lies, bullshit, manipulation and disinformation from a monstrous (and generally effective -- when it needs to be) psywar campaign in order to glean out the few potentially useful data points.
4) Put these data points in perspective, weight them properly, come to an understanding, exercise sound judgment, etc.

And then these people would have to resurrect some lost sense of civic duty (and personal responsibility, of course) -- and then face the neocon machine (including in the form of their neighbors, family, boss, etc).

In sufficient numbers, this is never going to happen.

Reality is scary, and life in the cocoon is comforting.

Which is why we have to structure broader appeals.

[DaveT]

26. The solution to the dilemma of contradictory poll results

is to realize that polling is a crock of shit.

The overwhelming majority of respondents to this kind of poll have NEVER thought about the point of the question being asked -- one way or the other. People hear bits and snatches of "news"; shards of invective on talk radio or cable TV; snippets of yak with friends, relatives and random news junkies.

When they consent to give up a few minutes of their time to a pollster, they react to the questions, which, by the way, are circumscribed as multiple choices for ease of statistical analysis. In a very real sense the question creates the opinion rather than measures it.

Polling can of course easily be slanted, but that is not what I am getting at here. Even when -- especially when -- the pollster takes pains to avoid loading the question with partisan spin, the respondent is making up his "opinion" on the spot -- an opinion that she never would have had bothered with on her own.

The consultants have proven a thousand times over that planting a factoid in this miasma of pop culture always creates an echo in the polls.

I think it is unfair to dump on average citizens for offering up stupid answers to questions that they have never seriously thought about. I admit that most people are ignorant of public affairs and very few people give politics any systematic thought -- but those of us who are opinionated news junkies do not necessarily have much effect on the course of history for all our fretting.

We leftists need to concoct a new populism that engages people rather than hectors to them. Getting huffy because the majority does not bother to find real news on the internet is more than just counterproductive -- it is self destructive as well.

[BillZBubb]

27. How could ANYONE not have thought whether Iraq was a mistake?

I don't buy your argument on this particular issue. People with more than a cucumber between their ears have to have considered whether what is happening in Iraq is worth it or was the right thing to do.

If your suggestion is correct, people are even dumber, apathetic, and detached than even I could imagine--and that is saying something.

[AlwaysQuestion]

58. Elementary really

It's the ol' I'm doin' all right Jack syndrome. Moreover, the American people have been propagandized to believe that might is right; God's with them; and the belief that if ya ain't American, you're no one. And besides these people are busy--working to get more money to buy more things to send to the dumps to pollute. And there are just so many diversionary things to similarly pollute their minds with. Remaining still to contemplate is not an option with these people. Action however mindless translates to success of sorts. And for all the bloody religion that abounds south of the border (and even far too much for my liking here too), the Golden Rule is simply beyond their reach. And since there are many more of them than there are of us, we seem doomed to have to watch while they continue to take us down the path of destruction.

Oooohhhhhh, this is so depressing. I'm going to bed.

[necso]

29. Well,

I spoke not at all to the poll numbers. I just don't know whether these poll numbers are any good or not. Personally, I tend to distrust them, but I just don't know.

And I see no insults directed at people in my post. I called no one stupid, ignorant or anything of the sort. Certainly, I stated that there are some steps that many people need to take to gain more control over events. This was (is) a fair statement of my judgment in the matter.

Moreover, I did not direct my post at any particular group, other than (implicitly) those who have lost touch with reality.

There are many on our side that need to get their emotions in check (etc) too.

[DaveT]

43. Relative newcomer blunder, I hit "reply" to you

when I was trying to reply to the whole thread.

My apologies -- I was not trying to zing you at all.


This series of poll responses do seem to be extraordinarily dumb, however anybody wants to explain it.

[necso]

45. I should have given that

possibility more weight. (The last post is always susceptible to this, and I have probably made this same misstep.)

Misjudgment on my part.

The strange thing is that in a more general context, I rather agree with you (in part and with the usual conditionals, etc).

(And even more strangely, this may be why I responded the way that I did.)

However, I believe that it's every person's duty to achieve such knowledge and understanding (etc) of the world around him as is necessary to effectively deal with it.

But I'm not betting on it.

[Barrett808]

30. Fewer say it was a mistake?

Huh?

[geckosfeet]

31. War? What war? To call this disgusting and blatant transfer of

our national resources to the corporate entities a war is simply wrong. I would, very reluctantly apply the term military action although that implies some national interest was at stake.

This political and economic adventure was designed as a smokescreen to transfer our national resources, and Iraq's oil, to the coffers of corporate giants.

Thats not a war. Thats stealing.

[Carolab]

32. This guy has it right.

Richard Stoll, a political scientist at Rice University in Houston who has studied public opinion and the Iraq war, says support for President Bush's policies in Iraq has been gradually declining as the U.S. death toll has climbed and violence has continued.

"If there's no dramatic event like Osama bin Laden being captured, which is not predictable, I think we will continue to see American public feelings about Iraq slide downward," he says. "I don't think there's anything (the White House) can do that would all of a sudden cause that to reverse."

(OTOH, did anyone see how instilling fear in people is working to the cabal's advantage? Any doubts that the terra attacks are somehow premeditated/engineered/made to happen or allowed to happen?)

[AlwaysQuestion]

61. I'm still depressed

Maybe your political scientist has the answer. However, if Buscho doesn't want to leave the WH, how're you going to get him out of there if we can't do anything to prevent fraudulent elections? Besides which, for the most part, people in our part of the world are just plain complacent until as somebody else pointed out, they, personally, start to feel the pain. I want to throttle the lot of them. I do. I do.

I am so relieved to have found this site--somewhat selfishly I use it therapeutically. Knowing that there are others who think along the same lines as I do about what's going on around the world in terms of human suffering gives me a modicum of hope. But there's a helluva lot of improvement needed before I begin to settle down. I'm still a whole lot agitated. Still, I talk it up as much as I can up here. But just as unfortunately, we have the complacent and selfish here too. Surprise surprise!! :]

Re your OTOH, I don't trust BushBlairCo. I'm always harping on Bush, but whenever I do, I am harranguing Blair every bit as much. I've always seen Bush as a bastard--that ain't gonna change. Blair is far worse as he hurls his bullshit under the Labour flag. And I have no doubt whatever that the BB thugs are behind what's going on now. Proof? None whatever. Hunch? Based on their past performances of lies, and more damn lies.

[Carolab]

75. Work locally to prevent election fraud.

In answer to your question:

"how're you going to get him out of there if we can't do anything to prevent fraudulent elections?"

It's what I'm doing. At least we have a chance and it is one thing the grassroots can truly work on.

The prosecutions, etc. are out of our control.

[Voltaire99]

33. Dear Democratic Party Leaders: Are you listening?

The public has caught on--somewhat faster than you, it seems.

Time to stop promoting the foolish "more troops" mantra. Enough of the "we gotta win at all costs" bullshit.

It's time for you to start respecting public opinion.

Personally, I'll neither vote for nor contribute to any campaign that legitimizes this fucking war. And I know plenty of people in the party who feel the same way.

[ECH1969]

35. They believe we can't win

But, it was still the right thing to do?

What the hell.

[Disturbed]

36. What war?

It's called Armed Robbery.If there were no actual killing, maiming and destruction of property it would be called a hostile take over.

[BonjourUSA]

37. What is the "win the war in Iraq" meaning ?

Except to be an asshole aboard a carrier and shout out "the war is over", who is able clearly to explain what are the criteria of a victory in Iraq ?

[many a good man]

38. It WASN'T a mistake...

...it was ON PURPOSE!

[shadowknows69]

39. Believe we can't win but want to keep fighting anyway

the term sheeple needs to be upgraded to lemmings.

[leesa]

47. Well, duh! How could you possibly win an actual fighting war on terrorism?

[Corgigal]

59. They believe it's the right thing

because when they see the numbers of dead soldiers they aren't ready to accept that they died in vain. When they see the injured soldiers on TV that will never be the same, they don't want to believe it's because their Govt, with their supported, lied to them.

I bet they know but they won't say it out loud.

[AlwaysQuestion]

62. And these be the enlightened ones

responsible for bringing up today's kids? Oh goodgawd. Hope? If one believes in miracles!

[fortyfeetunder]

63. You know there is a problem when...

---the reason for initiating a war is nebulous
---the plan for victory and exit strategy is nebulous

Never mind the "Mission Accomplished" speech. We haven't accomplished a darn thing....

[0007]

64. I wonder what the true number indeed are!

[dbt]

65. WHY do Murkins hate Murka?!?!?

:evilgrin:

[plasticsundance]

69. The problem is that most Americans are not exposed to the war

They don't see or hear about the impact of the war to any great detail. The US is isolated by the US MSM, which serves to keep the American masses ignorant. In addition, people in the US just don't want to own up to their mistakes, or the fact that they don't have all the answers to distribute to other nations.

When the majority of Americans say that the US won't be able to establish a democracy in Iraq, I would bet by and large because most Americans blame the failure on the culture of Islam, or the native ways of the Arabs, rather than the obscene and illegal intrusion by the US.

The US has quite a bit of growing up to do.

[RedCloud]

70. Wait 'til they find out how cheap Iraqi oil is.

97 cents a barrel to extract. 6 times cheaper than anywhere else on Earth.

Why someone could make trillions of dollars if they could only take over the oil fields and grandfather French, Chinese and Russian drilling rights in the area.

[Deja Q]

73. How about that "war on terror" or "war against *'s enemies"?

Nice to see people waking up.

A little too late, but nobody's perfect.

[nolabels]

74. Is there a poll that asks who they think is or was more impetuous.........

arrogant and stubborn Nixon or Bush II?

We are sure to see the true reactionary in * come out sooner or later

[b4naftsci]

76. Getting Into Iraq

Sadly, it appears that starvation will occur for tens of thousands in the country of Niger.
Since Bush and his cronies were able to get the war they wanted in Iraq, partly based on the disinformation regarding Niger's uranium sales to Saddam, the least they can do is provide the country with some food.


kings lead hat

[Initech]

77. Only 32% think the war was a mistake?

That number should be WAY higher!

[salminen]

79. 46% say it was a mistake

32% is the number of people that think it is impossible to win.

[Initech]

82. Both numbers should be higher then!

I definately dont think we will win this war. The dems know it, the repubs know it, Bush knows it. That's why he makes up all these excuses as to why we should keep our troops in Iraq.

[salminen]

83. agreed

[salminen]

78. so, like 6% LIKE losing wars?

At least 6% of people think that we will lose the war, but the war was a good idea? 11% of people think it will not result in a stable democracy, but it was a good idea? 4% of people think that going to war with Iraq to find WMDs in Iraq was a good idea, even though they also think that Bush lied to them about the WMDs... Goodness.

[Miss Chybil]

96. We were lied in there, we can't win, but it wasn't a mistake? I just don't

get the logic.

:shrug: