Doesn't this war just breed more terrorism and ensure the lose of American Life?

[Insertalias]

Even if Americans view this war as liberating, 80% of Iraqi's see it as American occupation. The rest of the Arab world, who already hates us for our foriegn policies, can't view us as anything but oil greedy tyrnats who wanna take over the world. I don't believe this policy of war is helping the American "war on terrorism", but rather providing flames for the fire, as terrorist recruiters have one more reason to proliferate their hate for the US. The terrorist wanted to create a holy war, and a holy war is what they are getting.

 

[Annie]

Welcome, but you need to tell me where you are getting your poll data of 80%. Do they see it as a negative? From what I've seen, the biggest fear of the Iraqis is that we will cut and run.

Originally posted by Insertalias
Even if Americans view this war as liberating, 80% of Iraqi's see it as American occupation. The rest of the Arab world, who already hates us for our foriegn policies, can't view us as anything but oil greedy tyrnats who wanna take over the world. I don't believe this policy of war is helping the American "war on terrorism", but rather providing flames for the fire, as terrorist recruiters have one more reason to proliferate their hate for the US. The terrorist wanted to create a holy war, and a holy war is what they are getting.

 

[Zhukov]

80% see it as American occupation? Well 100% should, because it is. The real question is how many Iraqis want us to leave right now?

This war helped the WoT because it removed a state sponsor of terrorism who possessed ongoing WMD programs (and most likely WMD itself). I should think that was obvious.

The 'rest of the Arab world' does not hate us for our foreign policy. The Kuwaitis were glad to see Saddam go, we continue to have amicable relations with the Jordanians, the Saudis, the Turks, and Libya has decided to relinquish it's WMD.

The only parts of the Arab world that hate us are the ones who are understandably afraid of us: the despotic ones who support Islamic terrorists, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, et cetera.

 

[freeandfun1]

damn, you two got on this so fast I ain't got nuttin to say......

I can't believe the thread starter had the balls to say... 80%..... :

 

[Insertalias]

Wow that was fast.

As in the US poll, the trend lines in Iraqi public opinion were found to be distinctly negative. Thus, 71 percent of the Iraqi respondents said they considered coalition forces mostly as "occupiers" rather than liberators (19 percent). That rose to an overwhelming 81 percent when respondents from the Kurdish areas were excluded from the sample.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/FE01Ak01.html

When I posted this percentage I will admit it was from memory, I remebered hearing it on the news, don't ask me what channel.

I know coitis interuptis isn't the answer, but more innocent deaths on our side or theirs aren't the answer ither.

 

[Insertalias]

It is going to take me a while to post again so please be patient

 

[walwor]

What always amazes me is this idea that the "Arab world" is this organism that has one brain, and one set of thoughts, and we are always in danger of "angering" this organism. It is true that there is a tendency in the Arab world to be Arab-ly politically correct, i.e., always hate Israel and hate the U.S. for backing Israel. I think this comes mainly from these Arab despots who use hatred of Israel to divert attention from the corruption which is inherent in autocratic societies, and fanatical Islamic clerics who are addicted to a vision of Islam that will overcome its impotence of over a century by "taking over the world." These ideas will not be overcome by the noninterventionism of America and the West. We have treated these societies with kid gloves because of just this fear of the single-minded "Arab street" that will rise up as one and turn on us, and yes because we have made deals with governments that provide us with oil, and any change endangers our interests. The irony is that 9/11, ostensibly meant to punish America for its incursions into Dar al-Islam, has brought us into it in a huge way. We must push our ideas, also, the ideas that made America the great country and society that it is- democracy and liberty and freedom. If we imagine that the "Arab world" will reject democracy, it is the height of bigotry, that we think what we value cannot be valued by them. It is fear and bigotry that keeps us out of that part of the world. None of this is to excuse their bigotry and xenophobia, but our staying out of their world only encourages it and fosters it more. We must continue to engage them, and on our terms.

 

[st8_o_mind]

Originally posted by Insertalias
Even if Americans view this war as liberating, 80% of Iraqi's see it as American occupation. The rest of the Arab world, who already hates us for our foriegn policies, can't view us as anything but oil greedy tyrnats who wanna take over the world. I don't believe this policy of war is helping the American "war on terrorism", but rather providing flames for the fire, as terrorist recruiters have one more reason to proliferate their hate for the US. The terrorist wanted to create a holy war, and a holy war is what they are getting.

The answer to your question posted in the title of your thread is yes.

 

[Annie]

I subscribe to Gallop, but unfortunately they do not allow the graphs to be posted. Seems that you are partially right and majorly wrong; especially regarding the Kurds:

April 29, 2004
Gallup Poll of Iraq: Iraqis Consider Their Nation's Future


by Richard Burkholder, International Bureau Chief



Gallup, in partnership with CNN and USA Today, conducted 3,444 70-minute, in-home, in-person interviews with a nationally representative sample of Iraqis in 350 separate locations throughout the country in late March and early April 2004. The resulting data offer a wealth of insight on the current climate of opinion among Iraqis nationwide. Following is the second in a series of Gallup Poll Tuesday Briefing articles discussing the findings. (See Related Items.)

Assessments of America, Its Intent, Good Faith, and Commitment

Roughly a quarter of all Iraqis hold a favorable image of the United States (11% somewhat favorable, 12% very favorable), while at least one in three Iraqis express a very unfavorable appraisal (36%). The favorability ratings accorded to America's leading coalition partner, Britain, are nearly identical.

Furthermore, America's nationwide favorability ratings are inflated by the uniquely positive assessments provided by residents of Kurdish Sulaymaniyah, a province that was effectively self-governing for more than a decade before last spring's invasion. Within Sulaymaniyah, fully 96% give America a very (74%) or somewhat (22%) favorable assessment; outside the Kurdish northeast, just one in every eight Iraqis rate the United States positively (9% somewhat favorable, 3% very favorable).

In Baghdad -- home to a quarter of Iraq's population -- Gallup's polling indicates that America's image has declined sharply in recent months. In September 2003, our survey of Baghdad residents revealed that at least a quarter had either a somewhat (20%) or very (8%) favorable opinion of the United States. That proportion has fallen to just 1 Baghdadi in 10 in the current survey (8% and 1%, respectively).



Assessments of America's good faith and commitment are also harsh. Nationwide, only minorities say they agree with assertions that:

The United States will allow Iraqis to design their own political future as they see fit, without direct U.S. interference (28% agree, 57% disagree).

The United States is very serious about establishing a democratic system in Iraq (37% agree, 50% disagree).

The United States is very serious about improving the economic lot of the Iraqis (37% agree, 54% disagree).

The United States is completely serious about preserving the political and geographical unity of Iraq (33% agree, 51% disagree).
There is also concern about America's long-term intent: More than half (55%) say they agree with the assertion that "The U.S. will not leave Iraq unless it is forced to do so by Iraqis" (28% disagree).

Broad Support for a Democratic Form of Government, Constitutionally Guaranteed Freedoms

Notwithstanding any skepticism they may have expressed concerning America's determination to help establish it, Iraqis express strong support for a democratic form of government in Iraq. Iraqis strongly agree (84%) that what the country needs is "an Iraqi democracy."

More than half (54%) say that "a multiparty parliamentary democracy such as that in most European nations, the U.S., and some Asian countries" is acceptable to them -- a higher level of acceptance than is expressed for any of the other six possible models tested. In addition, significantly more Iraqis say they would prefer this model to any other single choice. The 40% who opt for a parliamentary democracy outnumber the 25% who say they would prefer "a system based on the Islamic concept of ‘shura' (consultation)," the 12% who want "an Islamic theocracy in which religious leaders or mullahs have a strong influence, such as in Iran," or the 7% who want "a royal constitutional regime such as the one that prevailed in Iraq before 1958." Fully half of Iraqis (50%) think a parliamentary democracy is the form of government Iraq is most likely to have five years from now -- royal constitutional regime was the second most-offered response, at just 7%.

There are, admittedly, some differences across sectarian lines. In the most strongly Shiite areas, a system based on the Islamic concept of shura is slightly more likely to be preferred (31%) than is a multiparty parliamentary democracy (27%). In strongly Sunni areas, a multiparty parliamentary democracy is preferred to a shura-based system, 31% to 23%. But the single most common expectation among both groupings is that Iraq will be a multiparty parliamentary democracy five years from now (expectation in strongly Shiite areas: 42%, strongly Sunni: 37%).



Equally important is the widespread support for the inclusion of certain basic guarantees once the country drafts a new constitution. The interim "Transitional Administrative Law" drafted and signed in early March pledges guarantees of freedom of speech, freedom of religious exercise, and freedom of assembly. Strong majorities say they believe the new constitution should guarantee:

Freedom of speech -- allowing all Iraqi citizens to express their opinions on the political, social, and economic issues of the day (94% agree, 2% disagree with this guarantee)

Freedom of religion -- allowing all Iraqi citizens to observe any religion of their choice, and to practice its teachings and beliefs (73% agree, 22% disagree)

Freedom of assembly -- allowing all Iraqi citizens to assemble for any reason or in support of any cause (77% agree, 12% disagree)
From June 30 Until Elections: A Caretaker Government With Limited Powers?

To what body will the CPA return sovereignty on June 30? Given the failure to organize elections, it has been assumed for months that the single most likely entity would be the Iraqi Governing Council (IGC) -- perhaps with its current membership enlarged by way of additional appointments.

Earlier this week, however, U.N. special envoy Lakhdar Brahimi advanced the notion of an interim Iraqi government whose principal figures might be chosen after consultations between the United Nations, coalition governments, and Iraqi dignitaries. This government would serve in a "caretaker" role, and would exercise authority only until it could organize and conduct nationwide elections next year.

What would be the perceived legitimacy of such a caretaker body, and do Iraqis perceive it as a preferable alternative to handing power to the current (or expanded) IGC?

Gallup tested the relative attractiveness of these same three options with Iraqis. The majority (58%) who say they would prefer sovereignty to be transferred to "a caretaker Iraqi government with limited powers, whose main responsibility would be to arrange and conduct elections" strongly outnumbered those who expressed a preference for handing power to either "the current 25-member Iraqi Governing Council" (11%) or "an expanded 50-member Iraqi Governing Council, whose additional members would be selected jointly by the current IGC and the CPA" (9%), with 18% unsure and 2% suggesting other options.

In short, there appears to be considerable popular receptivity in Iraq to taking an approach broadly similar to that now advocated by the U.N. envoy -- far broader, at least, than that extended to the other most commonly proposed options.

Long-Term Optimism Remains

Although Iraqis are divided on whether their country is currently better (42%) or worse (39%) off than before last spring's invasion (see "Gallup Poll of Iraq: Liberated, Occupied, or in Limbo?" in Related Items), there is striking optimism regarding the country's long-term future following the return of sovereignty on June 30.

Nearly two-thirds of all Iraqis (63%) say they believe their country will be either somewhat (34%) or much (29%) better off five years from now than it is at present, while just one Iraqi in 10 foresees the country being worse off five years hence (4% somewhat worse off, 6% much worse off). Also worth noting is the fact that these positive expectations were expressed by Shiites and Sunnis alike. More than half (55%) of those living in strongly Shiite areas say they expected Iraq to be better off five years from now (21% much, 34% somewhat), as did half (50%) of all those living in strongly Sunni areas (26% much, 24% somewhat). And a mere 12% of those in either grouping say they expected Iraq to be worse off five years from now (those in strongly Shiite areas: 5% somewhat worse, 7% much worse; those in strongly Sunni areas: 7% somewhat worse, 5% much worse).



Iraqis' expectations for the fates of their own regions are similarly optimistic: 65% see their governorate (province) as being better off five years from now (37% somewhat better, 28% much better), and just 8% think it will be worse off (4% somewhat worse, 4% much worse).

Iraqis are also optimistic about their own personal futures. Each adult Gallup interviewed was shown a depiction of a mountainside, with 10 "step" points marked along its slope. The top (10), they were told, represented "the best possible life you can imagine," and the bottom (1) "the worst possible life you can imagine." They were asked to point to the step they felt best represented the quality of their own lives at present, where they felt their lives stood five years ago, and finally on which step they thought they would stand five years from now. The average (mean) rating given for current quality of life on this 10-point scale was 4.7 -- a middling rating, perhaps, but still somewhat higher than the average of just 3.8 given for the quality of one's personal life five years earlier.

However, the average prediction given by Iraqis for where their quality of life would stand five years from now was 6.4 -- a significant expected improvement over the current average rating of 4.7.

 

[rcajun90]

>Even if Americans view this war as liberating, 80% of Iraqi's see it as American occupation.<


Show me a legit poll that says that. Where did you find it? www.deathtoamerica.com?

>The rest of the Arab world, who already hates us for our foriegn policies, can't view us as anything but oil greedy tyrnats who wanna take over the world.<

I stopped worrying what other people thought of me in Middle School. Grow up!

>I don't believe this policy of war is helping the American "war on terrorism", but rather providing flames for the fire, as terrorist recruiters have one more reason to proliferate their hate for the US. The terrorist wanted to create a holy war, and a holy war is what they are getting.<

Let's see why don't we all hold hands along Interstate 10 that stretches from Florida to California. We can all sing we are brothers and let's just love one another. Are you a hippie that just woke up from a drug enduced coma? They hate and what to kill us because of who we are. You aren't going to change their minds about that. All you can do is blow them up.

 

[KLSuddeth]

All you can do is blow them up.

nice......

 

[rcajun90]

Hey if we don't blow them up, they will blow themselves up and take a few of us along with them. No I vote we blow them up.

 

[KLSuddeth]

Here are my choices:

A. Respond with my thoughts on this
B. Ignore
C. Mock you by posting something quasi-humorous that is in no way related to the topic at hand.

I choose C

:

 

[Annie]

KL I like your husband, but you have a better sense of humor.

 

[KLSuddeth]

LOL Thanks

Im just a smart ass is all.....it breaks up the tedium of my life...

 

[rcajun90]

Here are my choices:

A. Respond with my thoughts on this
B. Ignore
C. Mock you by posting something quasi-humorous that is in no way related to the topic at hand.

I choose C

You should have quasi-chosen A. LOL!

 

[Chippewa]

Originally posted by rcajun90

Let's see why don't we all hold hands along Interstate 10 that stretches from Florida to California. We can all sing we are brothers and let's just love one another. Are you a hippie that just woke up from a drug enduced coma? They hate and what to kill us because of who we are. You aren't going to change their minds about that. All you can do is blow them up.

I love how most of the people who mock hippies are militant psychopaths like yourself.
Who is the "they" you want to blow up, all Iraqis?
Was that you that "blew up" 45 Iraqis at a wedding?

 

[Chippewa]

Originally posted by Sir Evil
And who do you represent? the league of terrorist sympathisers

What do you mean?
I represent myself.
Judging by your mug and name...

 

[freeandfun1]

Originally posted by Chippewa
Was that you that "blew up" 45 Iraqis at a wedding?

Yeah, 45 Iraqis with weapons, millions of Syrian and Iraqi Dinar, foreign passports, etc.

 

[rcajun90]

I love how most of the people who mock hippies are militant psychopaths like yourself.
Who is the "they" you want to blow up, all Iraqis?
Was that you that "blew up" 45 Iraqis at a wedding?

I love hippies and the likes because they are so naive and stupid. I don’t believe the wedding party excuse. They tried this in Afghanistan if you recall and they do this like on a weekly bases in Israel. They have been using human shields since Saddam. Don’t you remember the little British boy Saddam patted on the head? I doubt if there was a wedding party but it wouldn’t have stopped the militants from shooting at a U.S. helicopter. One simple fact that all you sympathizers forget. On 9/11 they killed 3,000 plus innocents on purpose! They don’t care. We do and we try not to kill innocents but stuff happens in war. Got it?