Fair play to the victims of Sept. 11. It is worth noting, however, the victims of the U.S. bombing campaign against Iraqi civilians. What of them?
Thousands, thousands, thousands at the hands of the United States’ “shock and awe” campaign. The only “weapons of mass destruction” in Iraq are embedded in the limbs of Iraqi children. Thousands of innocents as they lay in their beds. And they justify this as a “better option” when compared with Saddam. Evil personified. Evil. Evil. Evil. Beware sophism.
Wolfowitz? Rumsfeld? Bush?
How do they sleep tonight? And what makes them different from Laden?
PS. The U.S. supports dicatators. The KSA, Montesinos, et al. In fact, it is a dictatator itself. You’ll know that when you go there.
[quote=“Wall Street Journal Opinion”]Well, finally we have some evidence of where the truth may lie. Working with Zogby International survey researchers, The American Enterprise magazine has conducted the first scientific poll of the Iraqi public.
Conducted in August, our survey was necessarily limited in scope, but it reflects a nationally representative sample of Iraqi views… The results show that the Iraqi public is more sensible, stable and moderate than commonly portrayed, and that Iraq is not so fanatical, or resentful of the U.S., after all. 1) Iraqis are optimistic. Seven out of 10 say they expect their country and their personal lives will be better five years from now. On both fronts, 32% say things will become much better. 2) The toughest part of reconstructing their nation, Iraqis say by 3 to 1, will be politics, not economics. They are nervous about democracy. Asked which is closer to their own view–“Democracy can work well in Iraq,” or “Democracy is a Western way of doing things”–five out of 10 said democracy is Western and won’t work in Iraq. One in 10 wasn’t sure. And four out of 10 said democracy can work in Iraq. There were interesting divergences. Sunnis were negative on democracy by more than 2 to 1; but, critically, the majority Shiites were as likely to say democracy would work for Iraqis as not. People age 18-29 are much more rosy about democracy than other Iraqis, and women are significantly more positive than men. 3) Asked to name one country they would most like Iraq to model its new government on from five possibilities–neighboring, Baathist Syria; neighbor and Islamic monarchy Saudi Arabia; neighbor and Islamist republic Iran; Arab lodestar Egypt; or the U.S.–the most popular model by far was the U.S. The U.S. was preferred as a model by 37% of Iraqis selecting from those five–more than Syria, Iran and Egypt put together. Saudi Arabia was in second place at 28%. Again, there were important demographic splits. Younger adults are especially favorable toward the U.S., and Shiites are more admiring than Sunnis. Interestingly, Iraqi Shiites, coreligionists with Iranians, do not admire Iran’s Islamist government; the U.S. is six times as popular with them as a model for governance. 4) Our interviewers inquired whether Iraq should have an Islamic government, or instead let all people practice their own religion. Only 33% want an Islamic government; a solid 60% say no. A vital detail: Shiites (whom Western reporters frequently portray as self-flagellating maniacs) are least receptive to the idea of an Islamic government, saying no by 66% to 27%. It is only among the minority Sunnis that there is interest in a religious state, and they are split evenly on the question. 5) Perhaps the strongest indication that an Islamic government won’t be part of Iraq’s future: The nation is thoroughly secularized. We asked how often our respondents had attended the Friday prayer over the previous month. Fully 43% said “never.” It’s time to scratch “Khomeini II” from the list of morbid fears. 6) You can also cross out “Osama II”: 57% of Iraqis with an opinion have an unfavorable view of Osama bin Laden, with 41% of those saying it is a very unfavorable view. (Women are especially down on him.) Except in the Sunni triangle (where the limited support that exists for bin Laden is heavily concentrated), negative views of the al Qaeda supremo are actually quite lopsided in all parts of the country. And those opinions were collected before Iraqi police announced it was al Qaeda members who killed worshipers with a truck bomb in Najaf. 7) And you can write off the possibility of a Baath revival. We asked “Should Baath Party leaders who committed crimes in the past be punished, or should past actions be put behind us?” A thoroughly unforgiving Iraqi public stated by 74% to 18% that Saddam’s henchmen should be punished. This new evidence on Iraqi opinion suggests the country is manageable. If the small number of militants conducting sabotage and murder inside the country can gradually be eliminated by American troops (this is already happening), then the mass of citizens living along the Tigris-Euphrates Valley are likely to make reasonably sensible use of their new freedom. “We will not forget it was the U.S. soldiers who liberated us from Saddam,” said Abid Ali, an auto repair shop owner in Sadr City last month–and our research shows that he’s not unrepresentative.
None of this is to suggest that the task ahead will be simple. Inchoate anxiety toward the U.S. showed up when we asked Iraqis if they thought the U.S. would help or hurt Iraq over a five-year period. By 50% to 36% they chose hurt over help. This is fairly understandable; Iraqis have just lived through a war in which Americans were (necessarily) flinging most of the ammunition. These experiences may explain why women (who are more antimilitary in all cultures) show up in our data as especially wary of the U.S. right now. War is never pleasant, though U.S. forces made heroic efforts to spare innocents in this one, as I illustrate with firsthand examples in my book about the battles. Evidence of the comparative gentleness of this war can be seen in our poll. Less than 30% of our sample of Iraqis knew or heard of anyone killed in the spring fighting. Meanwhile, fully half knew some family member, neighbor or friend who had been killed by Iraqi security forces during the years Saddam held power. Perhaps the ultimate indication of how comfortable Iraqis are with America’s aims in their region came when we asked how long they would like to see American and British forces remain in their country: Six months? One year? Two years or more? Two thirds of those with an opinion urged that the coalition troops should stick around for at least another year.[/quote]
I find the Asian Wall Street Journal to be a lot like the Taipei Times – I don’t mind the business news, but the opinion section is a bit whacked. The same with this article. A few things that stand out:
“Asked to name one country they would most like Iraq to model its new government on from five possibilities–neighboring, Baathist Syria; neighbor and Islamic monarchy Saudi Arabia; neighbor and Islamist republic Iran; Arab lodestar Egypt; or the U.S.–the most popular model by far was the U.S. The U.S. was preferred as a model by 37% of Iraqis selecting from those five–more than Syria, Iran and Egypt put together. Saudi Arabia was in second place at 28%.”
The key figures here are the U.S. at 37% and Saudi Arabia at 28%. This is only a nine-point difference between two very different – and not very complimentary – systems. I wouldn’t call this Iraqis supporting the U.S. model “by far.” In fact, based on this survey, barely more than one-third of Iraqis support the U.S. model.
“It’s time to scratch “Khomeini II” from the list of morbid fears. 6) You can also cross out “Osama II”: 57% of Iraqis with an opinion have an unfavorable view of Osama bin Laden, with 41% of those saying it is a very unfavorable view. (Women are especially down on him.)”
Again, what does this mean? Does it mean that 43% of respondents have a favorable view of Osama bin Laden? Or are some of these neutral or having no opinion about him? (And why isn’t this information included in the article?) I’m not sure I’d want to a “coalition forces” soldier patroling Iraq and knowing that such a large part of the population has no problem with Bin Laden.
I won’t go on about the other figures or about the stupidity of writing that the threat of a Khomeini or Osama bin Laden can be “crossed out” or “scratched” from the list based on one survey done not very long after the end of the war.
By the way, I’m not defending the original poster in this thread. I’m just saying that this opinion piece is not convincing at all and contains a lot of inconsistencies.
I agree with some of your comments, but still I think the poll/survey has informational value. However, my point in posting the same was not to show that everything is perfect in Iraq. Rather, my point was merely to rebut Big Dunc’s asssertion that the US/Bush is basically the Great Satan. Clearly, Big Dunc’s perception is somewhat blurred by what he chooses to read and believe.
Big Dunce certainly knows how to commemorate 9-11.
He starts off with the standard line – “Gazillions and gazillions of Iraqi children lay dead before the evil American war machine” – and then quickly moves on to the ridiculous point that it’s sophistry to claim an Iraq without Saddam is a better option than one with him.
Yes, what sophistry! How could anyone be so intellectually shameless as to claim an Iraq without Saddam is a better option than one with him and his sons in charge?
By the way, does Big Dunce have a cite – from a source that doesn’t have “workers of the world unite” somewhere in its text – to back up his claim that “thousands, thousands, thousands” of Iraqi children died during the recent military campaign?
A much better way to commemorate 9-11: read this piece on Richard Drew, a photographer who saw first-hand and recorded many of the worst moments on 9-11.[quote]For Richard Drew the worst moment photographing the tragedy of the was not photographing the burning buildings, or people throwing themselves out of the windows to certain death, or the collapse of the buildings, nor any of the other gruesome sights that he saw that first day. His worst moment came when he decided to turn his attention on other parts of the story and moved up to the Armory where the families of the missing people were trying to locate their lost loved ones:
I agree with some of your comments, but still I think the poll/survey has informational value. However, my point in posting the same was not to show that everything is perfect in Iraq. Rather, my point was merely to rebut Big Dunc’s asssertion that the US/Bush is basically the Great Satan. Clearly, Big Dunc’s perception is somewhat blurred by what he chooses to read and believe.[/quote]
Understood. All I’m saying is that the ASJ should find better ways to do it. That poll - or at least the numbers provided in the ASJ article - make me warier than I was before. For example, I would have thought more than 57% of the population would have unfavorable views of Osama bin Laden.
Where in the Arab world do you think you could unfavorable ratings on bin Laden as high as 57%?[/quote]
Iraq. That’s what I just wrote. Maybe I’m too optimistic, though. Anyway, I would love to know how that particular question was framed and what the other 43% think.
Cold Front, do you find the statistics in the ASJ article convincing?
[quote]And what makes them different from Laden?[/quote]Bin Laden was trying to kill as many innocent people as possible. Bush was as least trying to limit civillian casuallties, that’s why it took so long. He could have flattened Baghbad and it would have been over in a day.
Where in the Arab world do you think you could unfavorable ratings on bin Laden as high as 57%?[/quote]
Iraq. That’s what I just wrote. Maybe I’m too optimistic, though.[/quote]
I think a 57% unfavorable rating is pretty good. There are some areas in the Arab world where polling shows the majority of locals think bin Laden is either innocent of 9-11 or a hero for pulling it off.
They were published to convince readers that Iraqis in the post-Saddam world are more hopeful for their future and tolerant of others than most media reports suggest. I think some of the survey results they showed are helpful in that regard; others – such as the one you cited showing more than a quarter of Iraqis wanting to remodel their future state on Saudi Arabia – are not.
Well I do not find Big Dunc a troll. Unfortunately, I think many people view the world as he does. (Again, sorry Big Dunc, but you are somewhat representative of the Chomsky brigade). I personally do not agree with his views, but … I guess he is certainly entitled to them. If he did not maintain a certain moral consistency in his albeit mistaken, misguided and thoroughly wrong views then I might agree. That said, once in a while I find cause to pause and think about the particularist approach to foreign policy. Even though I find that approach somewhat black and white and certainly exaggerated to find fault with US foreign policy, one must consider the possibility that others may view it in the same light.
Hurray for the Wall Street Journal study. It is about time that everyone stops viewing the Iraq situation as one big crisis. Hell France had a recent heat wave that killed more people, there are pile ups on freeways, accidents, SARS outbreaks, etc. and economic turmoil in many places around the world, but it is only news in Iraq and I suspect that writing about stable progress is how shall we say boring and therefore hardly newsworthy. Too bad. I think things are progressing and while there is clearly an insurgency, it is a manageable one.
Where in the Arab world do you think you could unfavorable ratings on bin Laden as high as 57%?[/quote]
Iraq. That’s what I just wrote. Maybe I’m too optimistic, though.[/quote]
I think a 57% unfavorable rating is pretty good. There are some areas in the Arab world where polling shows the majority of locals think bin Laden is either innocent of 9-11 or a hero for pulling it off.[/quote]
Those aren’t areas that were liberated from decades of rule by Saddam Hussein in a war that had a very small number of casualties. I expected more support for the U.S., meaning less for bin Laden. Then again, I’m not an expert on Middle East affairs, just an average reader who’s found the WSJ article insufficient.