The official blog of the Libertarian Party
September 10, 2007
Iraqis think 'surge' has failed
The 'Surge' has Failed -- at Least According to Iraqis
A recent poll conducted by BBC, ABC News and NHK has found that 70 percent of Iraqis believe the "troop surge" has failed in regions impacted by the surge. In fact, only a slight majority of Iraqis still feel that American troops should remain in the region, and this number is dropping fast.
Between 67% and 70% of the Iraqis polled believe the surge has hampered conditions for political dialogue, reconstruction and economic development, according to the August 2007 findings.
Only 29% think things will get better in the next year, compared to 64% two years ago.
The number of people wanting coalition forces to leave immediately rose since February's poll but more than half - 53% - still said they should stay until security improved.
This new poll comes at a bad time for the Bush administration, which is expected to call for more time and patience with a floundering occupation of Iraq. With more and more Iraqis turning against U.S. intervention in the country, and the outcome of Bush's heralded "surge" looking more grim, Americans may begin to increase pressure on the government to begin withdrawing troops from the country.
Posted by Andrew Davis at September 10, 2007 01:39 PM
Reader Comments:
How does this come at a bad time for Bush? He has repeatedly shown that he could care less what anyone else thinks. With low approval ratings and no need to worry about reelection he is right where he wants to be, free to do whatever the hell he wants. Of coarse all of this is possible thanks to Congress. He doesn't care what Americans think, so why would he care what Iraqis think?
Public opinion, in Iraq or America, does not determine what is right or true. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, Jihadism is the primary threat to western civilization and liberty. Islamism is fueled by nationalized oil, and the profits of illegal drugs trade in Afghanistan.
The allied occupation of Iraq is failing because of a fatally flawed strategy, rooted in altruism. Instead of re-building their infrastructure and aimlessly patrolling the hostile streets of Baghdad, US military forces should be deposing the mad mullahs ruling Iran (before they produce nuclear weapons).
After Thomas Jefferson defeated the Barbary Coast Islamist pirates, and the Enlightenment and industrialism in the west took hold, Islam had been held in check. The rise in oil prices the last few decades, and nationalization of western-created oil infrastructure, has fueled the revival of Jihadism.
Adding fuel to this fire, has been the west's self-inflicted wound of the anti-drugs war. As we speak, Afghanistan is producing a bumper crop of poppy, protected by Taliban and Al Qaeda forces. It's high time we held DEA warriors to account for their treason.
For diverse and vigorous discussion of wide-ranging topics, please join:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty/
Kevin, is it possible that it is not simply "jihadism" that is the problem, but our treatment of Muslims, causing the Jihad in the first place? What is different today than 50 years ago? Have "they" changed, or us?
Tell me more about this illegal drug trade in Afghanistan. Which street drugs do you claim come from that region? I don't know any hard drug users; I only know a couple pot smokers, and all their "stuff" is locally grown.
This is a reference to the opium trade centered in the northern regions of Afghanistan. Afghanistan is also known for it's trade in hashish. Yet another prime example of our domestic policies supporting the military might of our enemies.
I can't help but be reminded of the public service advertisements that aired several years ago, attempting to link the purchase of illegal drugs to supporting terrorism. All laws that subordinate freedom are bound to have a negative consequence.
The War in Iraq has simply been one of the greatest, if not thee greatest Military Victory in the history of the United States. We have accomplished all our objectives and then some.
We got Saddam! If we had failed in this our whole mission would have been an utter failure, and early on, it looked like this may be the case.
We got Zarcawi! This was a major victory which turned out to be only a one-day story on CNN.
We got the WMD for the most part. Or at least what was left of it - 500 missiles in a warehouse in the desert. But we did miss some - the WMD that was being stored at the UN Building in NYC.
Bringing democracy to the Middle East. Bush has simply been brillant in this regard. Who would have ever imagined free and open elections in the heart of the Middle East, that's even having the effect of spurning baby steps towards democracy in Bahrain, Kuwait, and Tunisia.
Bonus!! We killed Saddam's two evil sons Uday and Qusay. Major bonus points here.
The Libertarian Party better get with the program. The latest polls show Americans are backing Bush and the War in Iraq. If the LP stalls in its support, we're bound to see a losing year for Libertarian Party candidates natiuonwide.
Eric Dondero, Chairman
Libertarian Defense Caucus
www.mainstreamlibertarian.com
Fmr. Libertarian National Committee mbr.
Fmr. Senior Aide, US Congressman Ron Paul
Travel Aide, Ron Paul, Libertarian for President
1987/88
Wow, what poll are you referring too? Look, this war may have been a brilliant military victory. I don't think anyone is disputing that. The problem lies in the initiation of the war. If we have to make things up to invade a country we don't like, there is a problem. We are America, a country founded on principle, not religion or ideology. As soon as someone can prove to me that Iraq took down the Trade Center, I'm all for it. But we as a nation are treading a dangerous slope here. Liberty and freedom form within. They cannot be forced upon a people without defeating their own purpose.
The Liberty Party is fine were it is.
|
How does this come at a bad time for Bush? He has repeatedly shown that he could care less what anyone else thinks. With low approval ratings and no need to worry about reelection he is right where he wants to be, free to do whatever the hell he wants. Of coarse all of this is possible thanks to Congress. He doesn't care what Americans think, so why would he care what Iraqis think?
Posted by: Chad at September 11, 2007 06:43 AM