Poll: Fewer than half think U.S. will win in Iraq (CNN/USA Today/Gallup)

[sabra]

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/09/22/iraq.poll/

Poll: Fewer than half think U.S. will win in Iraq
Nearly two-thirds support a full or partial U.S. withdrawal


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Thursday indicated fewer than half of Americans believe the United States will win the Iraq war, and 55 percent of those surveyed said it should speed up withdrawal plans.

Only 21 percent said the United States definitely would win the war in Iraq, which began when a U.S.-led coalition invaded in 2003 to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. Another 22 percent said they thought the United States probably would win.

Another 20 percent of respondents said the United States was capable of winning in Iraq -- but probably would not. And 34 percent said they considered the war unwinnable.

The survey of 818 adults was conducted Friday through Sunday and had a sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

[Hissyspit]

1. What the hell does 'win' mean, anyway?

It was a no-win situation to begin with, America.

[sabra]

but but but Bush says we are winning the war on terrra!

[Hissyspit]

So, of course, the opposite is true. He said 'Brownie' was doing a good

job, too.

[TahitiNut]

10. It means never having to say you're sorry?

:crazy: It's a word that doesn't apply to a no-win quagmire.

[barb162]

11. I think "win" meant get the WMD, have democratic government,

have oil, no killing, no strife, no ethnic tensions, all Iraqis grateful we came in....

[Hissyspit]

19. yeah, any day now that's gonna happen nt

[barb162]

23. yeah, next week, right?

Seriously, I think that administration never had a clue as to what "win" meant.

[tainowarrior]

25. yeah really,

What do they mean by win? Goal posts keep changing

Never mind the illegality of the war and its lack of necessity (which, on its own, is enough to condemn our intervention).

We were told Saddam had WMDs, but he didn't, and having WMDs is never a reason for war. We probably knew he didn't have anyway because we probably would haven't risked our soldiers if he did have chem weapons.

We were told that he was a threat to us, but he couldn't even shoot down a single airplane all during the 1990s. He had no missiles to shoot us with.

We were told that after we removed him that we'd form the government. Iraqis protested and "elections" were held.

We were told Iraq was going to be a model democracy, but instead, as with many other Third World countries, particular groups use the elections to cement an even worse, restrictive regime (in this case, a pseudo-theocratic Shiite regime).

So, let me get this straight. We were lied to all the way, we spent $300+ billion, 2000 lives, 100,000 Iraqi lives, and all we get is a lousy theocratic-minded regime?

We didn't win a thing!

[wakemewhenitsover]

29. Does "win" mean Iraq becomes 51st state?

[Born Free]

33. Most Americans want to do the right thing

Most Americans want to do the right thing, they tend to believe and trust their elected officials, occasionally the leaders betray that trust and spread propaganda and lies as we have seen during this administration. Most Americans now are seeing it is a hopeless cause, but they still have problems admitting their elected leaders betrayed them. They are frustrated with all the elected officials as they trusted the two party system would prevent this betrayal but democrats rolled over rather than do their job. It's not the loss of lives that stops Americans, they will sacrifice everything if there is a "Just Cause" We are losing because there was no "just cause" and Americans can never win "Unjust" war, as the good in their souls holds them back. This doesn't help democrats a whole lot because they are to blame as well for refusing to do their job of protecting America from the betrayal and lies- democrats are as responsible as a cop that looks the other way while someone is mugged. It has been a sad time for America, no a sad time for the world.

[Ben Ceremos]

35. Where do you get that idea?

I have yet to see one who actually does the right thing, so why would I believe they want to? No Sarcasm!

http://www.edklesiastes.blogspot.com

[daninthemoon]

2. What does "win" in Iraq mean?

[Cocoa]

3. but we "have to" win!

that's what they keep telling us. We "have to win" otherwise all sorts of bad things will happen, like the terrorists getting our oil.

[Cocoa]

4. the 21% might be reading the wrong magazines

[Arugula Latte]

5. We're winning. Why? Because we say so. nt

[acmejack]

6. Well then, lets proclaim victory and get the hell out of there!

[firefox]

7. We will occupy them until they are free.

When we leave, they will be free. Take Sadam and go already.

[reprobate]

38. And the beatings will continue until Iraq shows a positive attitude.

[olddad56]

8. fewer than half think Bush is a human being.

[rodeodance]

9. we lost a long time ago.

[daninthemoon]

14. we lost the day * put our troops to this illegal mess.

[gratuitous]

12. So, who's going to be the last man to die for this?

I saw Leslie talking to Sen. McCain today, and McCain said that he thought we needed to stay the course, couldn't "abandon" the Iraqis, and so on and so forth, yadda, yadda, yadda.

I wonder if McCain will still be around when the last body comes back from Iraq? What will he say to the family? He said that he was going to meet with a group that included Cindy Sheehan, and signed off with the statement that he, like Bush, was going to meet with her once and then not again. Had all the enthusiasm of a man contemplating root canal.

Free advice to John McCain: Cindy Sheehan wants to know what "noble cause" her son died for. I suggest you work on an answer, because she doesn't take kindly to bullshit anymore. Her grief has worked itself out, and now she's tracking down the politicians who bloviate with platitudes rather than leveling with the American people. Got any "straight talk" left?

[jokerman93]

13. will win in Iraq?

That's not even funny. The only area of the country we can be said to control at this moment is the so called "Green Zone". We're dug in there and surrounded.

When is this much anticipated victory going to happen?

[Kelvin Mace]

15. Which just goes to show that more than 50%

of Americans are complete imbeciles.

[neuvocat]

16. And when its obvious to everyone that we lost...

you know good and well that the pukes and the freepers will find a way to blame it on liberals, democrats, protestors, and Bill Clinton.

[PurityOfEssence]

17. The worst idiocy of polls is that we assume most people will be right

Having said that, it's more than just obvious and has been since before this ugly land-grab that this is NOT winnable.

Whether the vast sweep of ignorant narcissists think something will or won't happen isn't the least borne out by history. 85% of Americans still believe in an afterlife. 20% of Americans think the Sun revolves around the Earth.

Popular opinion shouldn't be scorned, but it should be seen as what it is: ignorant assumptions driven by panic and keeping up with the Joneses.

Marlon Brando had a great moment in his autobiography where he decried the reverence people have for the opinions of the famous: he was asked about quantum mechanics on a talk show, as if his great wealth and status guaranteed him some sort of knowledge on this. His response was mystified disgust, and he promptly reminded people that he hadn't even finished High School.

Why the fuck to we presume that the majority understands much of anything? A mere flirtation with history confirms that the majority is almost always incredibly wrong. Yeah, that's an elitist point, but it's well supported by fact.

Yes, in this case the majority is right, but it's no great news; 52% of Americans didn't want to attack Iraq without a U.N. mandate in February of 2003. "The People" often get it right, but using popular assumptions as proof of much of anything is incredibly silly.

[tainowarrior]

26. my favorite part of it is

that as much as Americans like to "wish things away" by just increasing their "resoluteness" to being imperial narcissists, reality doesn't budget for anyone.

I can't wait for that collective "sigh" of defeat from the most rabid 30% Republicans who keep supporting Bush no matter what. That psyche crunching sense of not being able to keep the charade going.

I just finished watching "Downfall", a film about the last days of Hitler's regime, and the same doggone reluctance to surrender is the same reluctance I see in Americans today.

[PurityOfEssence]

36. Isn't that a great movie?

I couldn't agree more with your post. Remember, though, there will always be a few stalwarts who will stand by him no matter what; there WILL be a muffled snuffle of embarrassed disgust among the reactionaries, and it's already starting here and there.

Some of my conservative friends were already solemn and sullen on the subject last summer; one surprised me by saying he'd vote for Kerry because "Bush lied to me".

What will finally strip Junior of his old guard will be the undeniable incompetence of the administration; evil, greed and selfishness won't be what does it, but they'll eventually cast him adrift from all the endless bungling.

[anotherdrew]

18. soon the rabid-right will be blaming the troops for not trying hard enough

just like they did after viet nam.

[teryang]

20. What happening to the Orwellian jingo "winning the peace?"

At least the press calls it what it is now, "the war in Iraq."

Cordesman, often quoted and appearing on television frequently during the invasion and "occupation" always used the false phrase, "winning the peace." So did everyone else. Who invented that phrase, Rove?

Anyway, whoppers like "winning the peace" accepted uncritically by the press have died a slow quiet death, along with the characterization of the resistance as "not tactically significant."

[onenote]

21. say what? I thought the mission was accomplished

I must've fallen asleep....

onenote

[htuttle]

22. That statement is no longer operative

[Art_from_Ark]

31. But, but, but

Banners don't lie, do they?



:crazy::crazy::crazy:

[Solly Mack]

24. Win? Win? Someone thought Iraq could be a win?

How pathetic.

Naturally I know some people thought of Iraq in those terms "America Wins!"....but it's just such an alien way of thinking to me.

When you consider all the facts (the lies)...how can anyone even think that way?

[eridani]

27. Not possible to win, or possible to lose for that matter, if--

--you don't define your goals.

[olddad56]

28. The Bush Admin's goal isn't to win it, it is to prolong it.

[Charles19]

32. I agree, their goal is just to stay there as a show of force in the

region.

Their definition of winning is not having to leave.

The war is over in Iraq and Iran won.

[Dem2theMax]

30. Win what?

Hell ain't hot enough for * and the bastards that put us in Iraq.

[ladylibertee]

34. Figures.And it serves him right !!!

[jaysunb]

37. Win what ????

If Saddams in jail and there are no WMD, then what exactly is there to " win ? " :banghead: