Author Topic: What the people of Anbar are saying  (Read 9575 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
What the people of Anbar are saying
« on: September 17, 2007, 12:45:47 PM »

What They?re Saying in Anbar Province

 
By GARY LANGER
Published: September 16, 2007

IN his address to the nation on Thursday, President Bush singled out progress in Anbar Province as the model for United States success in Iraq. The president?s claims echoed those made earlier in the week by Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top American commander in Iraq, in his Congressional testimony. And they raised a question worth examining: Do United States military alliances with Sunni tribal leaders truly reflect a turning of hearts and minds away from Anbar?s bitter anti-Americanism?

The data from our latest Iraq poll suggest not.

Al Qaeda, it should be said, is overwhelmingly ? almost unanimously ? unpopular in Anbar, as it is in the rest of Iraq. But our enemies? enemies are not necessarily our friends. The United States, it turns out, is equally unpopular there.

In a survey conducted Aug. 17-24 for ABC News, the BBC and NHK, the Japanese broadcaster, among a random national sample of 2,212 Iraqis, 72 percent in Anbar expressed no confidence whatsoever in United States forces. Seventy-six percent said the United States should withdraw now ? up from 49 percent when we polled there in March, and far above the national average.

Withdrawal timetable aside, every Anbar respondent in our survey opposed the presence of American forces in Iraq ? 69 percent ?strongly? so. Every Anbar respondent called attacks on coalition forces ?acceptable,? far more than anywhere else in the country. All called the United States-led invasion wrong, including 68 percent who called it ?absolutely wrong.? No wonder: Anbar, in western Iraq, is almost entirely populated by Sunni Arabs, long protected by Saddam Hussein and dispossessed by his overthrow.

There are critical improvements in Anbar. Most important have been remarkable advances in confidence in the Iraqi Army and police. In ABC?s survey in March, not a single respondent rated local security positively ? now 38 percent do. Nonetheless, nobody surveyed in Anbar last month gave the United States any credit. Ratings of living conditions remain dismal: respondents were deeply dissatisfied with the availability of electricity and fuel, jobs, medical care and a host of other elements of daily life. And the violence, while sharply down, has hardly ended: One in four reported that car bombs or suicide attacks had occurred near them in the last six months. Last week?s murder of Abdul Sattar Buzaigh al-Rishawi, an Anbar sheik who had allied himself with the United States, only underscored this grim reality.

Anbar?s tribal leaders may have any number of motivations for their alliance with the United States. It?s been reported that the United States government has provided them arms, mat?riel and money, as well as undertaking more than $700 million in reconstruction projects in the province.

But it seems clear that popular sentiment in Anbar is another matter entirely. Indeed, one other result from our poll may be of particular interest to Anbar?s tribal leaders and the United States military alike: Just 23 percent in Anbar expressed confidence in their ?local leaders?; 77 percent had little or none. That?s better than it was in March ? but still nearly the lowest level of confidence in local leaders we measured anywhere in Iraq.

Confidence in local leaders, as it happens, is lower only in Diyala ? the other province Mr. Bush mentioned in his speech as a focal point of progress in Iraq.

Gary Langer is the director of polling for ABC News.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/16/opinion/16langer.html?_r=3&oref=slogin&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #1 on: September 17, 2007, 03:00:33 PM »
Hilarious.  But I've already figured out the fascist response:  The numbers were far worse before the surge.  (Of course, with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.)

I've figured this out - - the fascists don't give a shit about facts.  They make up some that they hope will shut up their liberal opponents, but if countervailing facts pop up, they just ignore them.  This is because the mission is made up first, the real reasons for it are so nefarious that they can never be admitted to in public, so the rest of the debate has to be conducted on totally false premises:  the U.S.  is in Iraq because of the "threat" of WMD, or, the U.S. is in Iraq to bring them "democracy," or the U.S. is in Iraq because there would be a bloodbath if they left.  Regardless, all the reasons are bogus.  So to debate the success or failure of the mission means accepting a bunch of false premises and arguing from there.  So in a sense the whole argument is phony because it never touches upon the real reasons for the mission.  There are no facts which could possibly be relevant to the debate as it is presently framed.

Henny

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1075
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #2 on: September 17, 2007, 03:03:19 PM »
Hilarious.  But I've already figured out the fascist response:  The numbers were far worse before the surge.  (Of course, with no evidence whatsoever to back it up.)

I've figured this out - - the fascists don't give a shit about facts.  They make up some that they hope will shut up their liberal opponents, but if countervailing facts pop up, they just ignore them.  This is because the mission is made up first, the real reasons for it are so nefarious that they can never be admitted to in public, so the rest of the debate has to be conducted on totally false premises:  the U.S.  is in Iraq because of the "threat" of WMD, or, the U.S. is in Iraq to bring them "democracy," or the U.S. is in Iraq because there would be a bloodbath if they left.  Regardless, all the reasons are bogus.  So to debate the success or failure of the mission means accepting a bunch of false premises and arguing from there.  So in a sense the whole argument is phony because it never touches upon the real reasons for the mission.  There are no facts which could possibly be relevant to the debate as it is presently framed.

Whether we should or should not be in Iraq is a non-issue now.

The issue is that we ARE there. Why argue in semantics instead of supporting whatever measures it takes to complete the mission while leaving the country in the best possible shape?

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #3 on: September 17, 2007, 03:08:10 PM »
Whether we should or should not be in Iraq is a non-issue now.  The issue is that we ARE there. Why argue in semantics instead of supporting whatever measures it takes to complete the mission while leaving the country in the best possible shape?

That does sum things up nicely, though given the predsiposed mindset Tee exposes with relish, we already know his answer     :-\
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #4 on: September 17, 2007, 03:11:55 PM »
<<The issue is that we ARE there. Why argue in semantics instead of supporting whatever measures it takes to complete the mission while leaving the country in the best possible shape?>>

Sure.  Maybe you ought to define the mission first.  And see whether "leaving the country in the best possible shape" is compatible with any of the mission's TRUE objectives.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #5 on: September 17, 2007, 03:22:00 PM »
<<The issue is that we ARE there. Why argue in semantics instead of supporting whatever measures it takes to complete the mission while leaving the country in the best possible shape?>>

Sure.  Maybe you ought to define the mission first. 

Been there done that.  Simply because the actual definition doesn't fit YOUR definition, doesn't refute Miss Henny's point, in the least


And see whether "leaving the country in the best possible shape" is compatible with any of the mission's TRUE objectives.

Given the actual mission objectives, vs your lame-arse versions that it's all about the oil, it absolutely is.  And let's even play your game for a microsecond.  You don't think the U.S. would want to leave Iraq in the best possible shape and defensibility, in order to protect those prescious oil wells,  (that we would have simply annexed ourselves and placed our own military around them 24/7, not letting any Iraqis near them, if it were actually all about the oil....not that reality plays much of a part in Tee's world)
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #6 on: September 17, 2007, 03:28:08 PM »
<<And let's even play your game for a microsecond.  You don't think the U.S. would want to leave Iraq in the best possible shape and defensibility, in order to protect those prescious oil wells,  (that we would have simply annexed ourselves and placed our own military around them 24/7, not letting any Iraqis near them, if it were actually all about the oil....not that reality plays much of a part in Tee's world)>>

I'd say an independent Iraq in full control of its own oil as in Saddam's day is preferable to an Iraq which is able to cut foreigners in on its wealth and is at the same time beholden to American power for its existence.  So there's a huge difference between the mission's real objective, control of a major mid-East oil producer, and what's best for Iraq, i.e. total independence including independence in oil. 

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #7 on: September 17, 2007, 04:46:49 PM »
Which of course completely glosses over that if this WERE for control of a "major mid east oil producer", we'd ALREADY BE IN CONTROL OF IT       ::)
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #8 on: September 17, 2007, 07:55:56 PM »
<<Which of course completely glosses over that if this WERE for control of a "major mid east oil producer", we'd ALREADY BE IN CONTROL OF IT>>

Which is one of the many, many reasons why this war is so humiliating and embarrassing for you.  It's a major blow to U.S. prestige in the world.  And very well deserved, too.

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #9 on: September 17, 2007, 08:01:52 PM »
Quote
It's a major blow to U.S. prestige in the world.

It would be if it were a stated goal. It wasn't. Even Greenspan clarified his remarks.


Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #10 on: September 17, 2007, 08:08:31 PM »
It would be a major blow to U.S. prestige even to the shrinking pool of True Believers who still believe in Bush's account of his motives.  Four years and you haven't subdued a nation of only 23 million people.  Despite all your advantages in air-power and weaponry.  Despite your enormous wealth.  But back to the real world:  where NOBODY believes the bullshit reasons given for the invasion, big humiliation.  Big embarrassment.  Regardless of motive.

<<Even Greenspan clarified his remarks.>>

I was expecting that.  He's not out to make enemies.    I believed him the first time.  I also believe the administration guy who told him "We can't talk about that [oil.]"  It's about oil.  Nothing else makes sense.


sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #11 on: September 17, 2007, 08:15:23 PM »
<<Which of course completely glosses over that if this WERE for control of a "major mid east oil producer", we'd ALREADY BE IN CONTROL OF IT>>

Which is one of the many, many reasons why this war is so humiliating and embarrassing for you.  It's a major blow to U.S. prestige in the world.  And very well deserved, too.

You're hysterical, Tee.  The U.S., this all mighty, all consuming, all evil entity, with the military might of no other country, who, IF they were everything you keep claiming they are, (supported by SQUAT evidence by the way), could in less than 24hrs secure said oil wells, the fact that they haven't and won't be is one of the "many, many reasons why", you're so full of horse manure.  It's precisely how Ami demonstrated also, no matter the result, it supposedly bolsters your position.....that's called a template.  If the U.S. were to take over Iraq's oul reserves, that would be validation of their evil.  The fact they don't apparently validates how incompotent they are at doing so.  It's literally hilarious     :D
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #12 on: September 17, 2007, 11:50:40 PM »
Well, sirs, I am just one of those folks who don't believe that evil and omnipotence go hand in hand.  Despite your pathetic boasting of the power and might of the U.S.A., it has had its ass kicked and handed over on a platter by the Viet Cong, peasant revolutionaries who were overmatched in guns, air-power, technology of all kinds and sheer wealth - - but they had something Americans lack: balls.  And so they won that war and drove the U.S. forces out of their country like a pack of whipped dogs.  Same thing is happening in Iraq.  America lacks the manpower to fight this war and is afraid to go to a draft because the citizens won't stand for it.  The Iraqi Resistance has the balls to stand and die for their land, but the only team you can whip up to face them are the dead-enders who had to join up from economic necessity and green-card-seekers, the vast majority of your citizens have no appetite for this struggle and won't lay their own ass on the line for it, that is painfully obvious.

The simple answer to your ludicrous and pathetic boasting is, get over yourselves.  You are NOT some all-powerful superpower, you are a bunch of spoiled over-indulged lazy and mostly cowardly citizens who employ a high-tech army  to take on barefoot guerrilla fighters, killing a million civilians because you don't have the balls to engage the enemy mano-a-mano without calling in air strikes and artillery without regard to any civilian targets.  And STILL you can't subdue this small country of 23 million people in four years of slaughter.  They are still slugging it out with you, a nation of 300 million.  And you claim you are NOT embarrassed by this?  You are NOT humiliated by this?  Incredible.

If I followed your "logic" I would have to conclude that if Hitler were truly evil, he would have conquered the world, and the fact that he didn't, and ended up utterly defeated only "proves" that he was really a good person.  Honestly, I don't know how your brain works, sirs, but you had really better disabuse yourself of the idea that the crushing defeat that the U.S. is about to receive in Iraq is somehow a proof of its virtue.  That is just plain crazy.

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #13 on: September 18, 2007, 01:49:42 AM »
And if we followed your (il)logic, and actually entertained the idea that the U.S. was this big massive power grabbing military machine, we wouldn't be having this coversation.  You see, that's the interger you keep ommitting in all these proclaimations of how terrible, & evil this country & and its military are......it's military capability.  Bottom line iis that if we wanted the oil, we could have taken it.  With the amount of soldiers & military hardware we have not just in the region, but in Iraq itself, that'd action would have been taking candy from a baby.  If we wanted Chalabi as head of Iraq, with all this "puppeteering" we supposedly are in charge of, he'd be heading it.  The fact is neither are the case, and your only fall back is that they were simply too incompotent to achieve those objectives.

I can't imagine how thin the air is in your reality
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: What the people of Anbar are saying
« Reply #14 on: September 18, 2007, 10:53:33 AM »
<<I can't imagine how thin the air is in your reality>>

No?  Just take a look at the air in YOUR reality.  The most powerful nation on earth that can have anything it wants by snapping its fingers (so you say) is stymied after four years of fighting a nation of only 23 million.  It has no manpower left to face a second war should one crop up.  ALL of its active combatants are either on extensions of extensions of their original tour of duty, or will be in 2008. Instead of victory, all you have to show for four years of fighting is either smarmy excuses ("We coulda had it if . . . ") or increasingly ludicrous promises (after 4 years!!) of "just around the next turn" or "stay the course and . . . "  Four years, BTW, is LONGER than your entire participation in WWII, just to put this in a little perspective - - from Pearl Harbor to Hiroshima.  And you're fighting 23 million people, less than TEN PERCENT of your own population.

Your problem, sirs, is that you are easily taken in by bullshit.  Most people are more impressed by results.  And the results are not good.  So even the best bullshit in the world no longer impresses most of us.  The spell doesn't last forever.  Unfortunately, you are still taken in by it. 

This is a real-life fairy tale, and the title of the story is "The Emperor's New Clothes."  You are going to be the last guy in the crowd who figures it all out.  Poor sucker.