Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

New Poll Show U.S. Soldiers OVERWHELMINGLY Want OUT OF IRAQ & SOON!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:12 AM
Original message
New Poll Show U.S. Soldiers OVERWHELMINGLY Want OUT OF IRAQ & SOON!
Op-Ed Columnist
The Soldiers Speak. Will President Bush Listen?

By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF
Published: February 28, 2006

When President Bush held a public meeting with troops by satellite last fall, they were miraculously upbeat. And all along, unrepentant hawks (most of whom have never been to Iraq) have insisted that journalists are misreporting Iraq and that most soldiers are gung-ho about their mission.

Hogwash! A new poll to be released today shows that U.S. soldiers overwhelmingly want out of Iraq — and soon.

The poll is the first of U.S. troops currently serving in Iraq, according to John Zogby, the pollster. Conducted by Zogby International and LeMoyne College, it asked 944 service members, "How long should U.S. troops stay in Iraq?"

Only 23 percent backed Mr. Bush's position that they should stay as long as necessary. In contrast, 72 percent said that U.S. troops should be pulled out within one year. Of those, 29 percent said they should withdraw "immediately."

That's one more bit of evidence that our grim stay-the-course policy in Iraq has failed. Even the American troops on the ground don't buy into it — and having administration officials pontificate from the safety of Washington about the need for ordinary soldiers to stay the course further erodes military morale.

http://select.nytimes.com/2006/02/28/opinion/28kristof.html?_r=1&hp&oref=login
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:16 AM
Response to Original message
1. You mean they aren't listening to Rush's lies anymore?
And Rumbo's propaganda isn't working?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:17 AM
Response to Original message
2. What they don't know is that they are never leaving Iraq...
because the Bush plan was to establish permanent bases to project military power into the Middle East.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Disturbed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:24 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. About 40% will rotate out but then...
many of those will be sent to Afghanistan and then back to Iraq for their 3rd tour. By now many troops have caught on that their stay in Iraq is not for the reasons that the Bush Regime and their officers have brainwashed them to believe. They are there to secure the oil flow.


"The terrorists want to control the oil. Our way of life will be at risk". George W. Bush (Nov. 2005)



Bush Regime Iraq Successes (Phase 1)

1. Saddam will no longer sell Iraqi oil via the Euro.

2, A military foothold in the ME. Other than Saudi Arabia.

3, No countries will be able to buy Iraqi oil that the U.S. disapproves of.

4. The Multi-Intl. Oil Corps are reaping great profits.

5.The Military Industrial Complex is a booming Industry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
0007 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:46 AM
Response to Reply #4
9. .....and to remind those that do not know or are unaware.
Ahmed Chalabi is sitting in that building as the new Ministry Of Oil.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harald Ragnarsson Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 11:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
18. And where on earth is all the Iraqi oil money going?
It's like $90 billion so far and I have heard no accounting of this money what so ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Harald Ragnarsson Donating Member (366 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #18
19. This cool article on another link, 2.6 million bbl/day oil production
2.6 mil x avg $63/bbl x 3 freaking years plus now= a whole lot of money! Where the heck is it all going? $163,800,000 PER DAY. For THREE YEARS. Now he's asking for another $72 billion on top of that, plus on top of the $250 billion they've already blown.

The entire article details the massive THEFT that is the George W Bush administration.

http://www.tompaine.com/print/grand_theft_baghdad.php

After an investment of billions, Bowen reports that slightly more than a third of all water projects planned will ever actually be completed. Currently, two of three Iraqis are left with no potable water; only one in five has sewerage. Furthermore, recent figures suggest that at 4,000 megawatts, nation-wide electrical generating capacity is below pre-war levels and far below the goal of 6,000 MW. Instead of rebuilding several steam-turbine power stations— as Iraqi engineers and managers recommended—the CPA’s crony contractors chose to build new natural gas and diesel-powered combustion-turbine stations, despite the fact that Iraq doesn’t have adequate supplies of either. As a result of this arrogance and neglect, billions were wasted while the electricity in Baghdad is on for just a few hours each day.

Meanwhile, at 2.6 million barrels per day, crude oil production is significantly short of the goal of 3 MBPD. Liquefied petroleum gas has fared worse, with the CPA adding just 500 tons per day to existing production capacity, when the goal was to add 1,800 tons daily.

Given these and other shortfalls, it should be alarming that very little of the $72 billion that Bush is requesting would go to finish these jobs. Worse, Bowen warns that “the Iraqi government is not yet prepared to take over the near or long-term management and funding of infrastructure.”

The problems are not simply technical and bureaucratic: there are also signs of massive corruption. In its 2005 report, Transparency International, which tracks governmental corruption around the globe, warned that post-war Iraq could be “the biggest corruption scandal in history.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. So are the rw freaks going to ask...
"Why do our troops hate freedom?".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maxrandb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. No. The RW Freaks will ask
"Why do our troops hate Amurika"?

The troops better watch out though. If in the future, a Purple Heart wearing, Silver Star earning veteran attempts to run for office, he'll be labeled an "Amurikan hating traitor that provided aid and comfort to the enemy, and faked his injuries and actions that led to his medals."

Well, that's if he happens to have a "D" after his name anyway.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hubert Flottz Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #5
7. If he has an R after his name he won't be in the military!
He will have better things to do, like shooting lawyers!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:28 AM
Response to Reply #3
8. Postwar Iraq Chaos Blamed on Poor Planning
Postwar Iraq Chaos Blamed on Poor Planning By PAULINE JELINEK, Associated Press Writer
Mon Feb 27, 9:55 PM ET



WASHINGTON - Poor prewar planning left the United States without enough skilled workers to efficiently rebuild Iraq's economy and public works, according to a report issued Monday.

The study by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction provided a new explanation for the lagging reconstruction effort. Surveys by the Bush administration and congressional auditors have blamed insurgent attacks and the high cost of security.

Thanks to inadequate planning, the report said, early occupation officials lacked enough reconstruction staffers who knew what they were doing.

It recommended the government establish a "civilian reserve corps" to deploy around the world for postwar rebuilding.

While reconstruction has cost American taxpayers about $30 billion three years after the overthrown of Saddam Hussein, the country still lacks reliable electricity, water and other services. Monday's report — covering the time the country was under control of the U.S.-led Coalition Provisional Authority — said early efforts were greatly affected by personnel problems.

.............................


"The United States can deploy military people quite easily," said James P. Mitchell, spokesman for the inspector general's office. "But when they need to deploy civilians, it's very difficult and complicated and there is no system to do it."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060228/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_iraq_reconstruction;_ylt=AmnU2WB3QSgj7X9wQfSvvQys0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA3ODdxdHBhBHNlYwM5NjQ-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The2ndWheel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:27 AM
Response to Original message
6. If there is a group
with even less power of opinion that us consumers, it's those expendable numbers in Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 07:52 AM
Response to Original message
10. Well as Pros most like war so this is odd
It is also not what the DOD tells us. Not that I usually believe them but, I wonder if they asked National Guard as many go in for educations and ex. reg. service to add to their retirement. I tend to think most pros in the service think that things are fixed by arms and not talk so I really will have to see more on this poll. I lived a good part of my life within the military life. Their are men who like this type if life and think it is the only way things can work.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 08:01 AM
Response to Reply #10
11. Were you around during Vietnam? The "pros" grew to hate.....
...that war, too.

There is a big difference between going to war for legitimate reasons, and going to war based on a pack of lies. Even the most gung-ho servicemen and women greatly dislike being asked to die to help fill some fat cat's pockets.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
izzie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 08:46 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. Yes I was around and it was a real mixed bag of thinking
I knew a lot of men that knew they had to go to make rates it nothing else. Many glad that they would not go as they hated war, and that war, but you still had man who liked the fighting. Just read Ollie North. Also so many men in the service think that force is the only way and even if they did not like the war they thought this way. Since this mess started we have heard they like what they are doing so I would like to see more polls on this before I would say it was really what they think. When we took out the draft we left a different group of men in the service, don't you think? My husband was a pro. Also do recall that I see it from the side line as a wife of a service man, so my view would be some what different than a man in the service or from a regular wife or a man just working on the out side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Renegade Six Donating Member (148 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 08:05 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. ok
I think what you describing is a small % of active duty. What you are saying sounds top me as if you buy the movie/tv stereotype of the military. Are you really trying to say that the NG is there for college/retirement and all the active duty personnel want to do is shoot there way out of disagreement? If you lived your life "within the military life" you would know that the military is made up of everyday people not bloodthirsty stereotypes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w8liftinglady Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 08:08 AM
Response to Original message
13. 5 kids in my son's unit d/c'd due to PTSD...so far
5 soldiers in my son's maintainance unit(not infantry) have been medically discharged with PTSD.God knows what they have made these boys do.My son told me of 2 weeks he had to go to Fallujah(He works on vehicles)-and all he could say was"It was bad.I sure wasn't fixing trucks"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
90-percent Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. visonary
Thank God we have a leader who will not be dissuaded by insignifigant little piss ant "focus groups" like our American Soldiers.

I think if one out of ten soldiers get executed for treason they'd suddenly find their missing patriotism.

-85% Jimmy

:sarcastic:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
buddysmellgood Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 08:52 AM
Response to Original message
16. Support the troops! This is an excellent point to bring up the the yellow
ribbon crowd.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
aden_nak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 10:56 AM
Response to Original message
17. No mission goals, no support, no victory scenario, daily casualties. . .
I just can't figure out these poll numbers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genie_weenie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Feb-28-06 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
20. What the HELL? Do you hate America!!!! What is this, 2003?!?!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC