Poll: 7 in 10 Afghans support US forces

[NJmaverick]

Good information for those that say we are not welcome in Afghanistan.

KABUL – Nearly seven in 10 Afghans support the presence of U.S. forces in their country, and 61 percent favor the military buildup of 37,000 U.S. and NATO reinforcements now deploying, according to a poll released Monday.

Support for U.S. and NATO forces, however, drops sharply in the south and east where the fighting is the most intense, the poll said.

Nationwide, 10 percent of Afghans support the Taliban, but the insurgents are backed by a higher percent of the population — 27 percent — in the country's southwest, the poll said.

The poll of a national random sample of 1,534 Afghan adults was conducted from Dec. 11 to Dec. 23 by ABC News, the BBC and ARD German TV, their fifth since 2005. The poll has an error margin of plus or minus 3 percentage points. Field work was done by the Afghan Center for Socio-Economic and Opinion Research in Kabul, a subsidiary of D3 Systems Inc. in Vienna, Va.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100111/ap_on_re_as/as_afghan_poll;_ylt=AmUmT2ysaa_rAAL7ylZ3.Wms0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNlNWc3NzhoBGFzc2V0A2FwLzIwMTAwMTExL2FzX2FmZ2hhbl9wb2xsBGNjb2RlA21vc3Rwb3B1bGFyBGNwb3MDMQRwb3MDMgRwdANob21lX2Nva2UEc2VjA3luX3RvcF9zdG9yeQRzbGsDcG9sbDdpbjEwYWZn

[mmonk]

1. Good news for the empire project and donor nations.

[NJmaverick]

2. So you refuse to acknowledge the fact that we are wanted there

did it ever occur to you that the Afghans don't want to live under the Taliban's brutal rule?

[ixion]

oh yes... because our brutal rule is so much fuzzier

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

5. Yet the poll shows your statement to be uterly nonsensical.

:eyes:

[ixion]

9. of course not, I also don't like how they destroyed 600-year-old Buddhas either

but that doesn't make our rule any less brutal.

So women can get education under US colonial rule? Boffo! But education is hard to use when you're blown up on your wedding day. Ooops! Our bad.

I guess you distinguish between "good" killing and "bad" killing? :shrug:

[NJmaverick]

13. We don't "rule" We prop up their elected ruler

who did a George Bush in the last election. Still the fact that the Parliment rejected most of the President's cabinet show they think and act for themselves.

So for the sake of proper evaluation let us talk accurately about propping up the Afghan govenrment and not that the "US is brually ruling" the Country.

[ixion]

21. propping up a puppet is rule by proxy, plain and simple, and

we have a history of being brutal in the countries we're liberating.

So, yes, let's do talk accurately. How many thousands of Native Americans Mexicans Koreans Laotians Cambodians Vietnamese Grenadans Nicaraguans Panamanians Iraqis Afghans must die before we get to be called "brutal"? :shrug:

[NJmaverick]

23. Hardly a puppet, If he was a puppet things would be easier

[mmonk]

118. Who did he used to work for?

[mmonk]

7. The empire project was ok with the Taliban for awhile

because they thought it would bring order. I'm always skeptic when news agencies from occupying forces conduct polls.

[NJmaverick]

8. Yeah, it's not like people don't fear getting killed by the Taliban

or anything like that.:eyes:

[MadHound]

3. Funny how those closest to the fighting are the ones most opposed to it

Not to mention the fact that any decent statistician can make a poll say almost anything you want it to.

But really now, just because a poll somehow shows a particular result doesn't make that result right. After all, I distinctly remember a few years back how the majority of Americans supported Bush and his invasion of Iraq. The neo-cons in this country were using those polls to bolster their argument, yet most people around here rightfully pointed out that just because people support an action doesn't make it morally right. Yet here you are, trying to make the same argument:eyes:

[NJmaverick]

6. Nice to see you brush off the FACTS

[MadHound]

11. So, by your logic our invasion of Iraq was a rightgeous one since the people supported it

A particular action is morally right and just independent of whether or not there is popular support for that action.

You are making the logical mistake of conflating popular support with what is morally right, something that the Bush administration and neo-cons did with the Iraq invasion.

Nice company you're keeping there with those illogical arguments:eyes:

[NJmaverick]

12. Nope, the Iraq war was an illegal invasion

but that's a whole different situation.

What I would like to see is that you are intellectually honest enough to acknowledge that the Afghans don't want us to leave.

[MadHound]

22. I would like to see that you are intellectually honest enough to recognize

That popular support for a certain action does not mean that it is the moral or ethical action to take. Think you can do that, or are you going to continue like the neo-cons did, hiding behind their polls and stats?

[MadHound]

46. Well, I guess that answers my question

And the answer is no, you can't be that intellectually honest.

[NJmaverick]

65. There are many good reasons for the US to stay

this is just one of them. Do you at least acknowledge that much?

[MadHound]

101. A poll of dubious reliability which shows our support amongst the Afghan people

Is a good reason why we should stay? Sorry, but no, it isn't a good reason at all.

The fact of the matter is that we need to get our military out of there ASAP. This isn't a military war that we're fighting with people like Al-Qaeda, it is a war of ideas. As soon as you bring a military force to a war of ideas, you lose. We've lost, period. The more people we kill, the more destruction we create, the more that the local people are going to be against us. Notice that the closer people are to the fighting the more their against us? That isn't coincidence.

We should pull out our military and send in our aid. Help these people out with aid, NGO's, in short a better idea. Show them that we can do much more than al-Qaeda can. That's the only way to win this war.

All the reasons to stay in Afghanistan are all bad. Illogical, morally bankrupt, just simply bad.

[existentialist]

4. this is of interest

There are, of course, significant questions regarding the reliability of the poll, but I don't think that it can be ignored either.

[NJmaverick]

10. Agreed

[stray cat]

14. DU doesn't care what the Afghans want - it messes up their arguments

[NJmaverick]

15. I would certainly welcome those that are willing to reevaluate their position

based on these new findings.

[StarfarerBill]

16. A tiny minority polled by an American company? Nothing to change minds here.

Until at least a majority of Afghans are asked what they truly want for their country by either the UN or an uninvolved nation, this only proves again that there are "lies, damned lies, and statistics".

[Lydia Leftcoast]

17. Yes, with a Western agency polling a small sampling of Afghans, how do we know

that the Afghans, who have ruled by a lot of nasty people in the past, aren't just telling the pollsters what they think the pollsters want to hear?

Also, note that support drops in areas where the fighting is taking place.

[NJmaverick]

We have the facts on the table, but it seems you are unwilling

to consider them.

[ProfessorGAC]

19. Sure Would Like To See The Methodology

How about you, Lydia? I want to know the exact sample size, the stratification criteria, and the questions themselves.
GAC

[NJmaverick]

25. You didn't even read past the headline! It tells gives you this information

but you don't like the FACTS so you are going to make up stuff to dismess it.

[ProfessorGAC]

28. Yes I Did

I always question polls like this. I'm trained in statistical sciences. I saw the 1534 value as the k. It says NOTHING about stratification methodology nor does it share the exact wording of the questions.

I never said anything about liking or not liking the result. You are putting words into my mouth or thoughts into my head. I said i'd like to see the details of the methodology to see just how reliable the results are.

If i knew that, then i could decide if i like or dislike the findings.

But, you don't clearly don't even understand the technical detail about which i'm speaking. So, i'll forgive your ignorance.
GAC

[NJmaverick]

30. Here is the detailed report

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1099a1Afghanistan-WhereThingsStand.pdf

[ProfessorGAC]

37. I'm Ok With The Questions, For Sure

They were not leading, that i could see.

I'm still not sure how the final demographic table compares, from a statistically significant perspective, of the actual distribution of geographic, age, educational, and financial silos.

That information is not in the report.

If those strata are consistent with the actual distributions, then the facts are the facts. If they want us there, they want us there. I don't even get to have an opinion. I don't live there.
GAC

[NJmaverick]

18. Now you know bettter than that. You know about the statstical sampling of polls

plus weren't you the one that made it a big deal about how we should honor the wishes of the Afghan people? It seems they have spoken, but you don't like what they said.

[StarfarerBill]

27. Indeed I was...and for something this vital, my objections still stand:

A tiny minority polled, perhaps with passively-intimidating US or NATO troops standing by for all we know, is far from sufficient to hang a continued and increased counterinsurgency on; I imagine a poll by insurgents would get the same results for their side.

In fact, a national referendum might be a good way to truly gauge Afghan majority desires, provided it can be done without intimidation by either side; again, probably aided by the UN or a group of uninvolved countries.

Until then, our war on Afghanistan continues.

[NJmaverick]

31. Here are the details of the poll

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1099a1Afghanistan-WhereThingsStand.pdf


Now since it seems they want us to stay, are you willing to change your view?

[StarfarerBill]

35. Thanks; I've already read the article, and thrice my objections and original view stand.

But if you want to hang your continued support for this war on this "survey", you have that right.

[NJmaverick]

38. That's not an article, it was a detail report of the survey

I had already felt our national security interests, the lives of those Afghans that have supported us and the woman's right to an education were big factors in our continued occupation, this just adds a huge new factor to the situation that only strengthens the moral standing of our endeavor.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

29. A poll by the occupying forces is going to elicit honest answers?

If you were old enough in the 1980s, would you have trusted a poll by TASS (the Soviet news agency) that said that the Afghans didn't want the Russians to leave?

Furthermore, I'd want to know how the questions were worded.

Two questions

Do you prefer the U.S. forces or the Taliban?

Do you want the U.S. forces in your country?

might yield quite different answers.

Any pollster worth his salt can word questions to increase the likelihood of the desired outcome.

[NJmaverick]

32. It wasn't conducted by the US Army

so now that we have new data that shows that the Afghans want us to stay, are you willing to change your views.

Oh here is the detailed report:

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1099a1Afghanistan-WhereThingsStand.pdf

[arcadian]

51. No it was conducted by a "company" that specializes in "polling" in war zones.

where the US has a militaristic interests. The "company" D3 Systems has it's headquarters in Tysons Corner, Virginia which happens to be where many other defense contractors and intelligence organizations have their offices. What a joke.

[bigtree]

33. no I really fucking don't care when it comes to this U.S. military interventionism

The decision to invade and occupy across sovereign borders has been on our own initiative, not Afghans. We shouldn't lose sight that we weren't invited into Afghanistan and asked by the Afghans to install a western-compliant regime to lord over them. While it's just bully that they're settling into acceptance of their occupiers, I'm certain we'll just brush aside the negative impressions in the poll which point to a clear mistrust and resentment of the offensive military activity which the mission is supposed to be based on. That's the flash point where Americans should be concerned about our involvement there, not whether Afghans have settled into acceptance of U.S. imperialism in their nation.

The question for Americans was always whether the mission was a correct one, both in terms of our nation's security and whether it actually helped or hurt the cause of reducing the insurgency and resistance forces arrayed against our invasion and occupation. The jury is still way out on the primary justification for escalating the forces. The goal is to set up the Karzai regime and their military as a wedge against rouge and fugitive 'al-Qaeda'. The efficacy and wisdom of that approach is certainly encouraged by this poll, but is in no means vindicated by this survey.

It's evident to me, at least, that our politically-driven grudge match against 'al-Qaeda' and every clown who identifies their violence with the fugitive propagandists will NEVER be in the interests of stability for Afghans.

[NJmaverick]

36. Your view that the facts don't matter is a common one here

While I fault Bush for failing to negotiate with the Taliban in the end our nation couldn't let Al Qaeda get off scott free for 9/11. I think it's a testimeent to our nation and it's soldiers (as well as a damning to the Taliban) that we are still welcomed after all these years.

[bigtree]

42. you have no regard for the truth

. . . demonstrated here by your childish retort that 'facts don't matter' to whoever disagrees with your booster posts.

I think it's revealing (and damning to any impression of your own understanding of the issues surrounding the occupation) that you still conflate all Taliban together, as one group, in your comments. Not even the administration and military leadership you unceasingly defend with these snipped posts agree that all Taliban pose a threat.

Are we bound to what Afghans want now? What happened to the primacy of U.S. interests in the deployment of forces abroad?

[NJmaverick]

71. I don't have regard for you odd brand you try to pass off as the truth

I deal in facts and figures and the objective truth.

[bigtree]

76. you've provided a handful of irrelevant facts to the efficacy and wisdom of the occupation

. . . and presented them here as the beat all/end all justifying the occupation. Your representation of this poll is deceptive, cherry-picked, and pollyandish. No 'truth' in all of that, maverick.

[Raineyb]

90. Don't pretend to give a shit what other countries want.

There are countries who would welcome our intervention and it doesn't happen. There are countries that want us the fuck out of their country and our troops are still there.

This military action is wrong and frankly we need to be concerned about fixing what the fuck is wrong here. We can't get everyone health care but we're going to spend trillions blowing people up because...?

Spare me the "this is what Afghans want" and at least own up to your paternalistic, pro-imperialism tendencies.

[seabeyond]

20. much more optimistic than a year ago. i heard that on bbc this morning. nt

[bigtree]

24. 'Views of the United States and NATO's performance remain poor'

Complaints about official corruption are higher than ever. Views of the United States and NATO's performance remain poor, with six in 10 rating their work negatively. And accounts of local violence have held steady, with many Afghans still blaming allied forces for civilian casualties. All these raise the question of whether the overall improvements can hold as Hamid Karzai's honeymoon fades and the fighting continues.

There also are significant regional differences. Support for U.S. and NATO efforts are sharply lower in the South and East, where the fighting is heaviest. Local support for the Taliban rises to 27 percent on its home turf, in the country's Southwest, vs. 10 percent in the rest of the country. And views of the country's direction are markedly less bright in some high-conflict areas, such as Helmand, heart of the opium poppy trade.

. . . support for the surge drops to 42 percent in the South and East; support for the presence of U.S. forces also drops in these regions, and support for attacks on U.S. and NATO forces, while sharply down overall, remains much higher in the restive South.

Most Afghans also continue to call allied air strikes unacceptable – 66 percent, but down from 77 percent last year.

There is one conflicting result; more Afghans also say the United States and NATO are doing worse, not better, in avoiding civilian casualties, by 43-24 percent.

http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/views-improve-sharply-afghanistan-criticisms-us-stay-high/story?id=9511961


All of that negative highlighted, this is bully for the interventionists. I still say the price is too high in casualties and the animosity and destabilization of the region by resistance forces which everyone admits are increasing, not diminishing. It's important to keep sight of the primary justification for remaining engaged in Afghanistan cited by the president. His intention is to use the Karzai regime and their military as a defensive wedge against fugitive and prospective 'al-Qaeda' in the country and the region. In that effort, the U.S. has escalated offensive U.S. military activity in the south of Afghanistan. The survey shows that there is no improvement in the impression of the U.S. forces in those regions of Afghanistan where our military has escalated the fight against the Afghan insurgency. That escalation of force is what most detractors of the occupation point to as the destabilizing element of the increase of troops. Indeed, in the calls for reconciliation, Obama officials have admitted the perception of our occupation fuels much of the resistant violence.

One interesting point in the poll was the numbers of Afghans who say they favor some negotiated settlement with the Afghanistan Taliban. That sentiment, thankfully was represented in several statements by administration officials this week expressing support for some kind of reconciliation with the "70%" of Taliban who they say aren't a threat.

It would help if the response to this poll isn't just a kneejerk, ringing endorsement of every aspect of the U.S. military mission there. Outside of all of the cheerleading that's predictably going to spike behing this release, there are still significant and important questions about the efficacy and sense of U.S. military intervention in Afghanistan and the region which can't be washed away by this poll. As I said, the president's own justifications for remaining militarily engaged in Afghanistan center on much more than some generic approval rating registered among Afghans.

[NJmaverick]

26. Thanks for the link to the "Vies improve sharply" article

while you certainly are focuses like a laser on the negative, the FACT remains this is certainly good news and provides a major moral justification for our current activities.

[bigtree]

34. I'm just trying to counter what I see as your unfailing defense of the indefensible

. . . an effort I think you make just to defend this president. Myopic and pollyanish, I think.

[NJmaverick]

39. Your postion's lack of factual support sort of leaves you in the land

of "BECAUSE I SAY SO". Frankly that is one of the poorist positions to be in and is nearly never the right one.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

41. Project much?

In effect, you're saying, "This poll supports the Obama administration's position, so I won't accept any criticisms about how it was administered or how it contradicts other polls or how keeping U.S. forces in Afghanistan is bad for America's overall well-being. All that matters to me is supporting the administration. Whatever they say. And if their position changes tomorrow, so will mine."

Who needs freepers when you have lockstep administration supporters on the Dem side?

[NJmaverick]

54. What I am saying, is here are the facts. Facts should be used to form our opinions

not the other way around.

[bigtree]

44. The critics in your posts always provide much more factual info than you

You can't point to more than one snipped part of an article provided by you in this thread, however. I guarantee that I can provide whatever factual support for my argument that's appropriate if needed. It's just a waste of time to go that deep in response to the little jibes you offer in defense of your weak premises. Waste of time, NJmaverick.

[NJmaverick]

53. You haven't provided factual information. WORSE you ignore

the FACTS that are presented to you, because they don't fit your view. Facts should form one's view, not the other way around.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

61. OK, the conversation with the brick wall is over

n/t

[NJmaverick]

63. Yeah your comments about "project much" showed you

are unwilling to look at the facts and adjust your opinion accordingly.

[bigtree]

62. there you are lying again about what I've presented here

. . . as you continue to ignore the most troubling aspects of the query. Inspiring.

Point to ONE nonfactual statement I've made in response to the little blurb you provided in the op. I'll wait.

[NJmaverick]

64. You have refused to acknowledge the FACT that the Afghans want us to stay

and support the build up. How about we start with that.

[bigtree]

66. Your idiotic claim that you are presenting 'facts' is just sad and embarassing

Your 'facts' don't add up to anything more than just another pollyandish defense of the indefensible surrounding our occupation in Afghanistan.

It's funny how you believe this poll amounts to anything more significant than the propaganda it was intended to serve as. I'll leave you to base your justifications of our military involvement in Afghanistan on what 1500 of occupied Afghans told the pollsters they want. Their views may come as a surprise to the MILLIONS of the rest of their countryfolk.

This performance of yours doesn't even rise to the level of pathetic, NJMaverick (is the 'maverick' just a joke?) . . . it's just ignorant.

[NJmaverick]

69. "lying" "idiotic" "pathetic" now that sort of flaming is either intended to distract

or to throw me off balance. Neither is going to work though. You need to address the fact that the Afghans want us to stay and you want us to leave and leave them to the mercies of the Taliban.

[bigtree]

72. you have no balance

. . . all of your little booster posts are weighted heavily in myopic defense of the administration and the Pentagon.

Fuck what 1500 Afghans are said to want in this poll. It'll be a cold day in hell before I base my view on the efficacy and wisdom of deploying our military forces abroad on what 1500 Afghans say in a poll. You, on the other hand, are obviously mollified by this propaganda. Brilliant.

[NJmaverick]

74. "Fuck what 1500 Afghans are said to want in this poll"

That just proves my point that you cherry pick your facts to based on your preconceived notions rather than develop you opinions based on a study of the facts. Plus it shows a bush like unwillingness to vary your position when faced with new facts.

[bigtree]

75. that's right maverick. I don't base U.S. military decisions on what 1500 Afghans say they want

. . . in a poll. It's embarrassing for you that you'd represent that as justification.

And, maverick, you've presented NOTHING in this thread, or any other, which is 'a study of the facts'. Just talking out of your ass here.


and Bush-like? Project much?


"In Afghanistan, we helped to liberate an oppressed people. And we
will continue helping them secure their country, rebuild their
society, and educate all their children, boys and girls." State of the
Union, January 28, 2003

"We've seen in Afghanistan that the road to freedom can be hard; it's
a hard struggle. We've also seen in Afghanistan that the road to
freedom is the only one worth traveling. Any nation that sacrifices to
build a future of liberty will have the respect, the support, and the
friendship of the United States of America." Remarks on Humanitarian
Efforts in Afghanistan, October 11, 2002

"Our commitment to a stable and free and peaceful Afghanistan is a
long-term commitment." Statement with Afghanistan's President Karzai,
September 12, 2002


"In Afghanistan, the Taliban used violence and fear to deny Afghan
women access to education, health care, mobility, and the right to
vote. Our coalition has liberated Afghanistan and restored fundamental human rights and freedoms to Afghan women, and all the people of Afghanistan. Young girls in Afghanistan are able to attend schools for the first time." Proclamation 7584,Women's Equality Day, 2002, August 23, 2002

"And thanks to our United States military and thanks to a coalition we
put together -- and thanks to the coalition we have put together, we
have freed the people of Afghanistan from one of the most repressive
regimes in the history of mankind. Not only are we steadfast in our
desire to defend that which we believe, we also are willing to commit
resources to free a nation." Remarks at the Knoxville, Tennessee,
Civic Center, April 8, 2002

"That cause was to liberate the Afghan people from terrorist
occupation, and we did so. Next week, the schools reopen in
Afghanistan. They will be open to all -- and many young girls will go
to school for the first time in their young lives. Afghanistan has
many difficult challenges ahead -- and, yet, we've averted mass
starvation, begun clearing mine fields, rebuilding roads and improving
health care. In Kabul, a friendly government is now an essential
member of the coalition against terror." Remarks on the World
Coalition for Anti-Terrorism Efforts, March 11, 2002

"All fathers and mothers, in all societies, want their children to be
educated, and live free from poverty and violence. No people on Earth
yearn to be oppressed, or aspire to servitude, or eagerly await the
midnight knock of the secret police. If anyone doubts this, let them
look to Afghanistan, where the Islamic 'street' greeted the fall of
tyranny with song and celebration." State of the Union, January 29,
2002

Office of Global Communications http://www.whitehouse.gov/ogc
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

40. Well, that explains why we're sending more troops to kill them.

[NJmaverick]

55. So you claim. The FACTS disagree with you

or are you saying the Afghans like to be killed?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

80. I'm saying, if the poll has any validity, it's not necessary for us to be there.

Of course, the validity of the poll is highly questionable, to say the least. But, even if it is valid, what's the point of staying there? If 70% of the people are on "our side" the insurgency must be petering out and headed for failure and is no threat to us.

Or, to put in simple terms: What's the fucking point? If our aim is, allegedly, to "disrupt" Al-Queda in Afghanistan, then Obama has only to don a flight suit, announce "Mission Accomplished" and get the hell out of their country.

[whatchamacallit]

43. I bookmarked this just for you

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=385&topic_id=421515

It's short so please watch it all.

[NJmaverick]

57. Are you serious? This is your facts? Mysterious youtube videos?

I have seen one where a cat plays the piano, does that mean you think cats really do play the piano?

[whatchamacallit]

68. Did you watch it?

Or are you doing the chickenhawk dance to avoid it?

[NJmaverick]

73. Yes it reminded me of a documentary that claimed the moon landing was faked

[whatchamacallit]

112. Really?

What part of it is faked or didn't happen? Your disguise wears thin...

[rug]

45. "Support for U.S. and NATO forces, however, drops sharply in the south and east

the fighting is the most intense, the poll said."

I'd like to know more about D3 Systems, Inc. and how this poll was conducted.

[tekisui]

47. Here ya go. Links to how it was conducted and the report:

More Afghans also say the United States and NATO are doing worse, not better, in avoiding civilian casualties, by 43-24 percent. This may reflect dismay over widely publicized individual incidents, such as the bombing of a pair of hijacked fuel tankers in September that killed scores of civilians in Kunduz province. It’s another measure the allies want to move their way if their basic support is to rise.

BOTTOM LINES – Fundamentally, just 38 percent rate the work of the United States in Afghanistan positively.

(snip)

Nearly all Afghans – 95 percent – now say official corruption is a problem in their area, up 23 points since 2007. Seventy-six percent say it’s a big problem; both are new highs.

Outside their immediate area, 90 percent see official corruption as a problem at the provincial level, and 83 percent call it a problem in the national government in Kabul – both vast numbers – with nearly two-thirds saying it’s a big problem at both these levels of government.

(snip)

Strikingly, just 42 percent in the South and East support the presence of U.S. forces in their area, compared with 78 percent in the rest of the country. Positive ratings of the U.S. performance dive to 16 percent in the South and 28 percent in the East, vs. 45 percent in the rest of the country. And just 26 percent in these two regions are confident in the ability of U.S. and NATO forces to provide security, compared with 56 percent elsewhere.

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1099a1Afghanis...
______________________________________________________________________________________
The South and East have seen the most violence and have seen an increase in violence recently. The pollsters state that they polled 1,534 randomly selected Afghans in all 34 of the country’s provinces.

Selection of sampling points was based on population proportion.
______________________________________________________________________________________

Of the 101 districts initially drawn in the sample, 11 were inaccessible for security reasons and were randomly replaced with other districts in the same province.

http://abcnews.go.com/PollingUnit/afghanistan-poll-note...

[NJmaverick]

58. Here are is the detailed report (rather than cherry picked comments supplied by the other poster)

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1099a1Afghanistan-WhereThingsStand.pdf


You can study the report in detail.

[laststeamtrain]

48. Choosy mothers choose Jiff Peanut Butter. n/t.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Bigmack]

50. The South Vietnamese "supported" us, too...

but, tough as they were, they were unable to put together a military that could stop the march of the North.

The Afghanis are going to have to build an army/police force that somehow transcends clan, ethnic, and regional loyalties. They are going to have to control the war/drug lords. They are going to have to end corruption. They are going to have to develop a government structure that they can trust.

Shiiiit... we can't do most of that in our own country. How do we expect that from people who haven't yet undergone the Enlightenment, the Nationalist period, the Industrial Revolution, a Civil War to hash out the internal differences, and a revolution in education?

Support for us doesn't mean shit. Being able to do the fighting for themselves is what counts. Desertion in the Afghan Defense force is over 50% and retention after expiration of enlistment is 10%.  Afghan commanders have sold their troops' ammo.  The Taliban are using the Afghan army boot camp to train their fighters.  That way, when they defect, they take their uniforms and weapons, too.

We need to get out and let them run their own country.

[KG]

52. of couse, a poll of the occupied, by the the occupiers, couldn't possibly

be skewed by that dynamic. :eyes:

[GreenMetalFlake]

56. Of course not. Vested interests haven't any need to manipulate 'facts' to suit their aim$

[NJmaverick]

60. You are incorrect this was not a poll conducted by the "occupiers"

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1099a1Afghanistan-WhereThingsStand.pdf

[NJmaverick]

59. You are incorrect this was not a poll conducted by the "occupiers"

http://abcnews.go.com/images/PollingUnit/1099a1Afghanistan-WhereThingsStand.pdf

[TheKentuckian]

67. Cool, I reckon once we kill the 30% we can go?

You do know that the effective definition of insurgent is a motherfucker that wasn't thinking about your ass until you occupied his country and is now giving you the bum's rush, right?

Tell you what if 70% wants us there then they can at least pick up the tab. Oh, it's my dime you say? Well, I'm feeling kinda Stupek on that and don't want my money spent in that fashion so Halliburton and General Dynamics will need a special ryder for funding.

[NJmaverick]

70. Yet the facts don't support your view

See the problem, for you, is tha tthe Taliban are not popular and never was popular. They are a brutal bunch of fanatics that have no sense of human rights.

[TheKentuckian]

77. Dude, you didn't even address what I said you're so busy spinning for war

I've never said almost a peep about what the Afghans want, other than an appreciable percentage don't want us there and my disinterest in fighting them on it. If they don't want the Taliban then they can deal with them or at least stop flipping to them when it suits them.

The Taliban has been routed, we did what we said we were going for. If those people want a different life then they need to do the fighting dying and spending, in my opinion.

There are a ton of horrible governments, including many on our "friends" list like the Saudis. It is not our job to run around the world burning our blood and treasure spreading democracy and freedom. If you believe it is then make that case but don't talk to everyone like they are a fool for not going along with the NJMaverick/Bush Doctrine.

I believe US forces should be used for US interests and jacking around getting killed by a minority of hacked off Afghans isn't an effective use of resources compared to the possible gains.

In short, unlike many others on "my side" I don't particularly give a fuck about the Afghans or their rights and I'm damn convinced that this action isn't even addressing much less solving the reason we are there which is to destroy organized terror networks, which have bogeyed out years ago and attacking from various places, as anyone with a brain advised long ago.

If the Afghans want to stand up for themselves against the Taliban then arm them and let them settle it. There are brutal fanatics everywhere including right here at home. We are counting every cent that is DESPERATELY needed to rebuild our own infrastructure, economy, and health care system while throwing trillions at a bunch of bullshit that funnels wealth to the MIC and away from the people and that is unacceptable no matter how popular it might be with the people without skin in the game, because they don't have to.

[NJmaverick]

78. The Taliban were routed, but thanks to years of mismanagement

by George Bush the Taliban are poised to take over the Country, should NATO leave in the near future.

[bigtree]

79. where did you get that 'fact'?

The administration you're defending doesn't seem too jazzed about the Taliban returning to power.


In a speech at Washington’s Brookings Institution on Thursday, Richard Holbrooke, the US special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, said that his office viewed the process of reconciliation between the Afghan government and the Taliban as “high on our personal priority list”.

He claimed that up to 70 per cent of Taliban fighters held no allegiance to Al Qaeda, or even the Taliban “supreme leadership”, but fight instead for nationalist reasons.

… there isn’t any question that our policy has to include an opportunity for those people fighting with the Taliban who are not members of Al Qaeda to rejoin the political process,” said Mr Holbrooke.

http://forum.globalsecurity.org/showthread.php?t=35271

[NJmaverick]

85. It's my opinion Bush screwed up

the factual status of the Taliban was gleened by considerable research.

[bigtree]

109. back to school maverick

Where are your 'factual information' on that? :eyes:

[TheKentuckian]

81. Again, so what? The Taliban doesn't have a numbers or technological advantage

If the people don't want them their they can fight them like they fight us and to much greater effect. Our problem is Al Queada and even the hawks say there are a hundred or less now and the bulk of them are elsewhere still plotting and training. The action is by definition counter productive, all we are doing is fighting insurgents who are one again motherfuckers who weren't studding you until you took over their country, pissed them off, and now are firmly insisting you take your leave.

If someone invades my country, I'm probably going to be an insurgent regardless of why they say they popped in and I'd bet my bottom dollar that you're no different.

If they want a different life then they will have to EARN it like everyone else.

[NJmaverick]

88. From what I have read there are 20,000 Taliban forces

that is a sizable army

[Bigmack]

95. 20,000....

and we have 100,000 troops, 100,000 "contractors", control of the air, all the high-tech weapons, and unlimited supplies.

And the Taliban is "resurgent".

How many troops (and casualties) and money will we need to wipe out 20,000 guys?

We've (actually.. you've) been at this for 8 years, no end in sight and we're told to expect 300-500 casualties per month.

From 20,000 guys.

Man... am I glad our military doesn't have to face any modern, well, armed country..... we'd be screwed.

[NJmaverick]

100. general rule of thumb is in a comflic like this

you need a roughly 5-1 numeric advantage, with the mountains maybe 7-1.

[Bigmack]

111. What's the rule of thumb...

on time in conflicts like this?

What's the "acceptable" KIA & WIA rates in conflicts like this?

I just want to know how many dead Americans, and maimed Americans (not to even mention Afghanis) I can look forward to... and when this might end.

Then we'll know how big a "Wall" memorial we're going to need, and can start planning now.

[spoony]

98. I noticed that, too.

I'm pretty sure they just cut and paste their propaganda AND their replies.

[readmoreoften]

82. And the likelihood that this poll is skewed and carefully crafted is about 100%

Considering that it conflicts with what just about all reputable reporters from the area have assessed, I'll pass thanks. A poll of urbanites in Kabul coming out of restaurants and fashion shows don't count.

*This is garbage and you know it.* But, then again, if Obama rolled out a "Mission Accomplished" sign, you'd buy that too.

[NJmaverick]

84. The poll is pretty sound, it would be better if you considered the information

and consider modifying your opinion.

[walldude]

83. I read a poll that said 90% of the 2500 respondents thought the bank bailouts

were brilliant and would be willing to hand over more tax money at any time in the future for banks that need it.




Of course they took this poll STANDING ON FUCKING WALL STREET.


Your idea of what constitutes a FACT is fucking hilarious. You have used this poll to state many times in your thread that this is a FACT. It's not a FACT. It's a poll. A poll that could be skewed in about 50 different ways.


That said, what difference does it make? We aren't there to please the Afghan people are we? I thought we were there to fight terrorists over there so we don't have to fight them here. I thought we were stopping the Taliban not defending the Afghan people. Since when does anyone in America give a shit about the Afghan people? Since when do you?

If someone had said we were there to "save the Afghan people" I might have actually supported some kind of military action, but the fact is we don't give a shit about the Afghan people or we wouldn't have trained and armed the fucking Taliban in the 80's.

[NJmaverick]

86. Please provide a link to this poll you claimed to have read

it sounds made up. While the poll and the methodology behind it is real and factual (much to your dismay).

[apocalypsehow]

87. "Poll is skewed"; "Neo-con polling outfit"; "leading questions"; "sampling errors"; yada, yada.

Without even looking at a single one of the replies (yet), I'll bet some version of all of the above has been posted by those who do not like the results of this poll - if not the exact verbiage.

It never fails around here: when people see poll results they don't like, they start attacking the polling methods and persons who conducted it.

[NJmaverick]

89. ding! ding! ding! ding! You win the prize!

for getting it 100% right!

[NJmaverick]

93. It's funny how many people will distort the facts to fit their position

rather than adjust their position to the facts.

[robdogbucky]

91. NOT. YOU . AGAIN

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ

[NJmaverick]

92. I know the inconvenient truth

not your favorite thing to deal with

[Name removed]

96. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NJmaverick]

102. You just love to change the facts to fit your position

rather than let the facts tell you your position. Not a very good idea.


oh the "numbnuts' comment was helpful. It told me I need to keep my vocabulary on a third grade level.

[bullwinkle428]

94. Did they sample outside the Karzai family?

[spoony]

97. Chickenhawks clucking, what else is new. nt

[NJmaverick]

99. If anything you have shown a willingness to bend the facts to your position

rather than let the facts determine your position.

[spoony]

104. Lol, The word "facts" should take out a restraining order against you

You've stalked and abused that poor word like no one in the history of this site.

[NJmaverick]

106. Welll it's clear you never give facts any attention

[bigtree]

110. heh

yep

[seeinfweggos]

103. that's pretty inconvenient for the obama bashers

those who call afghanistan another vietnam are either ignorant of afghanistan or vietnam or both.

[RedCappedBandit]

105. Well then let the 1,534 Afghans pay for it. nt

[happy_liberal]

107. Did they really think we would be fooled by this?

:rofl:

[NJmaverick]

108. It's remarkable how many will dismiss facts, that don't fit their preconceived notions

out of hand. Then again it also explains a great deal.

[IndianaGreen]

113. Poll done by a subsidiary of D3 Systems Inc. in Vienna, Va.

Key D3 Systems, Inc. Financials

Estimated Annual Sales $14,000,000.00

Employees At This Location 16

Employees Total 16

D3 Systems, Inc. Executives
Title Name & Bio Contact
President David A Jodice

http://www.hoovers.com/company/D3_Systems_Inc/jftcfjjkf-1.html

Who is this guy, and who pays him?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

114. Is that anywhere near Langley?

Heh-heh-heh.

[IndianaGreen]

115. It is closer to Falls Church

where some SOCOM contractor activity is located. All of these people are connected to MIC.

[ArmajaDasComatose]

117. Thanks for including that!

[apocalypsehow]

116. *Kick* for an excellent OP.

:kick:

[IndianaGreen]

119. Experts on Afghanistan doubt survey on foreign occupation: results are impossible

Experts On Afghanistan Doubt Survey On Foreign Occupation: Results Are Impossible

A new survey of the Afghan people is being touted as evidence that hearts and minds may, in fact, be warming to the U.S.'s military presence, which is heading into its ninth year.

MSNBC's Rachel Maddow, generally a critic of the continuation of the war, heralded the survey as hopeful news on Tuesday night.

But can it be taken seriously?

In a word, no, say people who have worked extensively on the ground in Afghanistan.

HuffPost interviewed Prakhar Sharma, head of research at the Centre for Conflict and Peace Studies (CAPS) in Kabul, who has done a large amount of public-opinion research work in Afghanistan, where he is based; Matthew Hoh, a foreign service officer who resigned last September in protest of the administration's Afghan policy; Anand Gopal, a Wall Street Journal reporter who has traveled widely in Afghanistan; and Christian Parenti, a reporter with The Nation who travels frequently to Afghanistan and was the field producer of the Afghanistan-based documentary The Fixer

Four of the five say that reliable survey results in Afghanistan are impossible for several obvious reasons, and some not so obvious. The obvious ones first: The Taliban controls large swaths of the country and the war has made much of the country unsafe to travel through. The Taliban doesn't do surveys, so anybody approached by somebody with a clipboard knows that the person either represents foreign troops, the central government or a private company associated with one or both.

Then there are the not-so-immediately obvious reasons: Afghanistan is a highly patriarchal society, meaning that getting a woman's true opinion is extremely hard. Sharma said that his research teams have never been able to get even close to the 50-50 male/female split that the ABC survey claims.

Getting a man's honest opinion is no simple task, either, he said, because the responses are calculated to protect and benefit the respondent's family and village. "The Afghans know it when they see sudden changes in development assistance, changes in government officers, police tashkils/numbers , more/less operations immediately after the polls. It is difficult to pretend to them that the polls do not matter. Their responses are therefore calculated," he said.

Those with experience in Afghanistan were skeptical that the surveyors actually went where they said they did. "If you look at it, the polling was conducted in built-up areas, in urban areas where we have our bases and where the Afghan government has a presence, primarily off the major highways," said Hoh. "So through the South and West of the country, primarily it was done right along Highway 1 where the government has control and where we have control. Off those areas, we don't have control."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/01/13/afghanistan-experts-doubt_n_422482.html

Here are the threads were the flawed survey was posted:

Poll: 7 in 10 Afghans support U.S. forces

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=4219906

Poll: 7 in 10 Afghans support US forces

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=7438570