Iraqis 'back attacks on troops' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4369350.stm)

Millions of Iraqis believe attacks against US and UK troops are justified, the leaked results of a poll conducted for the coalition suggest.

Which is why they've risked life and limb to go vote for a constitution last week and why the insurgency has to be fueled by foreign jihadists. :rolleyes:

Which Iraqis got polled? The Sunnis? The Jihadists?

Wow darth you really are in denial about a little thing called REALITY

Less than 5% are foreigners, more like 2%. According to the Coalition (AKA the US and Britian). Just like the poll Red posted.

so hows your hunt for WMD comin along?

No guerilla,

It's not so much reality that is being denied, it's the fact that there is always a missing factor involved whenever a bit of bad news comes out of Iraq. I've seen similar polls a couple of years ago showing that the Iraqis "oppose" the American occupation. But what the Iraqis opposed was the fact that it was the U.S., not the Iraqis that was running the government. That problem has been rectified. Also, JUST after Baghdad fell, there was stories about Iraqis chanting that they'll give their life and blood for Saddam. What prompted THAT display was the fact the Iraqis feared that somehow Saddam was going to re-take Iraq and they were just covering their butts.


The suspicious thing about this little gem of a post Red was so kind to find is the timing. The polls were taken in August and the results are being reported NOW? Just after the Iraqi citizens just ratified their Constitution. Just after good news about Iraq came out. Odd timing. The Iraqis hate coalition forces so much, yet they risk their lives to vote? The "insurgents" have threatened to kill those who turn out to vote, yet zillions of Iraqis turned out to vote. Again, it's odd. The Iraqis hate U.S. troops, yet they are doing as we want. Something's wrong.


Also take in the fact that the BBC is way less than friendly to the American cause in Iraq, Red just hates the U.S. and YOU, guerilla, just want Bush to fail and I'm not going to buy the idea that the Iraqis are as discontent as they are portrayed. Dammit.


so hows your hunt for WMD comin along?

You mean after Saddam had some dozen odd years of practice hiding his WMDs from weapons inspectors and an additional 18 months of warning while Bush was running about trying to convince a corrupt U.N. and an American Left more interested in playing politics than doing what's right? Well, DUHHHHHH? Geez!


Oh, and Iran, Syria and Saudi Arabia ALL have an interest in seeing the Democratization of Iraq fail. Such revolutions have a rather nasty tendency to spread and the three mentioned countries, being dictatorships wish to squash democracy before it has a chance to grow, dammit.

"boo-hoo...the world doesn't conform to my nationalistic views so its all lies and you hate America, so there."

Originally posted by Darth Be'lal
Which is why they've risked life and limb to go vote for a constitution last week and why the insurgency has to be fueled by foreign jihadists. :rolleyes:

Which Iraqis got polled? The Sunnis? The Jihadists?

The interesting thing about it is that this was a poll conducted, in secret, by the occupation forces themselves! :p It was then leaked to the media.

So it carries far more weight than most studies - the people opposed to armed "insrugents" are admitting what support they have!

The interesting thing about it is that this was a poll conducted, in secret, by the occupation forces themselves! It was then leaked to the media.


Really? When I read the article, it stated that the poll was done by "an Iraqi Research team."


It also stated that Iraqis get polled continuously. So this is one poll out of many. Again, there's something fishy about an AUGUST poll showing up in late October just after a successul Iraqi election.


"boo-hoo...the world doesn't conform to my nationalistic views

If the Iraqis truly didn't want American forces in their country, there would not have been two successful elections and there would be massive demonstrations against our occupation in Iraq. Neither has happened so far. Not saying it's beyond the realm of possibility, but so far the Iraqis seem to want American style democracy more than Saddam style dictatorship or Iran style theocracy, dammit.


so its all lies


No, but I think there is something missing in that news article.



and you hate America, so there."

You DON'T hate America? Wow, that's a whopper!

Both elections were not such. There were not successful becuase not everyone was allowed to vote. There were many cities where no voting was held. WTF kind of election is that? Besides that the results of both elections were very very suspicious. Particularly the last one where 99% of the people suppossedly voted. Last time I saw only fascist, psuedo-democracy dictatorships ever had 99% voter turnout. That and places where the votes are rigged. Both votes were not democracy nor were they legitimate. Your also ignoring the fact that they were held under occupation which makes them illegitimate by international law.

Not saying it's beyond the realm of possibility, but so far the Iraqis seem to want American style democracy more than Saddam style dictatorship or Iran style theocracy, dammit. Then you obviously haven't been paying attention. Islam is the basis of the Iraqi constitution and holds the 'trumph all other provisions' language. Now if when you say American style dmocracy you are talking about rigged votes and the lack of voting in certain areas then yes mission accomplished.

BTW your still pushing that foreign fighter BS when they make up a very small minority of the resistance.

No, but I think there is something missing in that news article. What like something that fits your fantasy view of Iraq? Is it so hard to believe that Iraqis don't want foreigners running through their country torturing and murdering people with impunity? But hey like I said don't let reality clog your view of the situation or anything...

Both elections were not such. There were not successful becuase not everyone was allowed to vote. There were many cities where no voting was held. WTF kind of election is that? Besides that the results of both elections were very very suspicious. Particularly the last one where 99% of the people suppossedly voted. Last time I saw only fascist, psuedo-democracy dictatorships ever had 99% voter turnout. That and places where the votes are rigged. Both votes were not democracy nor were they legitimate. Your also ignoring the fact that they were held under occupation which makes them illegitimate by international law.


In short, in your view, the world cannot be made a better place while a Republican is in the Whitehouse. Politics first, humanity second. Or are you going to try to convince me that all your bile isn't about trying to Get Bush?


Then you obviously haven't been paying attention. Islam is the basis of the Iraqi constitution and holds the 'trumph all other provisions' language.


So it's utopia or don't even bother trying? Not that you'd care, so long as Saddam's brutality is far, far away and doesn't affect YOU, why care?



BTW your still pushing that foreign fighter BS when they make up a very small minority of the resistance.


Without assistance from Syria and Iran, the Iraq "insurgency" would've died by now.



What like something that fits your fantasy view of Iraq? Is it so hard to believe that Iraqis don't want foreigners running through their country torturing and murdering people with impunity?


Saddam and the "insurgents" are much, much more brutal than U.S. troops would ever be capable of being.

You know what your problem is? You suffer from Selective Outrage Syndrome. The symptons of S.O.S. is extreme outrage over ANYTHING that might get Bush out of Office and spectacular apathy over any other bit of human rights abuse, natural disaster, corruption or bad news.

Actually 500, the voter turn out in Brazil is very close to that number, and they're not fascist... Also, it's not like this constitution was passed by a land slide. In fact, it was only a few points away from being denied. 2 of the 3 necessary provinces got a 2/3 majority to deny the constitution, and a third province got something like 58%. Not suprisingly, these were the areas with the greatest Sunni concentration. I'm sure that areas without any Sunni opposition had very high numbers in the opposite direction.

Second, they were not held under occupation, the Coalition is there as a security force. If the Iraqi government asked those forces to leave, they would be forced to comply.

Third, there's always more story than what's reported. I'm not denying the results of that particular poll, but I agree with Darth that there are probably some things working under the surface which are not apparent in the article.

Finally, last time i checked, the Iraqi's were in charge of the government and it was the Terrorists who were going around murdering people. Talk about a skewed view of reality...

One last note, 500, is it just me, or are you actually disappointed that this constitution went through?

From a year and a half ago...
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2004-04-28-poll-cover_x.htm

BAGHDAD — Only a third of the Iraqi people now believe that the American-led occupation of their country is doing more good than harm, and a solid majority support an immediate military pullout even though they fear that could put them in greater danger, according to a new USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll.
+++++++++++++++++

Gotta love the skewed wording in the suppossedly liberal media. Presenting the Pro-US minority view in stead of focusing on the majority.

66% of the Iraqis wanted the US out over 1 /12 years ago. That number has only grown since. Gee I wonder why the Iraqi people weren't asked about that in the election?

The US did a great job with Afghanistan don't you think? W took down an Islamofascist state to replace it with the world #1 opium producing islamofascist state. Yeah US!

(edit- BTW you can criticize the poll and call it innacurate all you want but it just shows your hypocracy. An "election" in which there are no polling outlets in a number of cities is nothing more than an incomplete poll as well)

Finally, last time i checked, the Iraqi's were in charge of the government and it was the Terrorists who were going around murdering people. Talk about a skewed view of reality... yeah no kidding...Maybe you can explain why the occupying soilders aren't subject to Iraqi law them hmm? Or how about the Iraqis that are murdered and tortured everyday by US troops? Not saying that terrorists aren't killing Iraqis. My definition of terrorists just isn't as nationallistic as yours. One group of terrorists in Iraq just happen to have billion dollar backing while the other does not.

One last note, 500, is it just me, or are you actually disappointed that this constitution went through? yes I am. Islam is the basis of the new constitution. The US suppossedly trying to root out Muslim extremism invaded the only secular country in the Middle East and turned it into a theocracy. Go ahead pat yourself on the back. You know you want to.

Lets not also forget that the rules for the vote on the constitution were changed just before the vote to make it far easier to pass as well.

In short, in your view, the world cannot be made a better place while a Republican is in the Whitehouse. Your the asshat that believes and activly endorses partisan politics. leave me out of it. I think they are all assholes.

Without assistance from Syria and Iran, the Iraq "insurgency" would've died by now. You just keep that blindfold on and your fingers in your ears and believe whatever you want. I'm not gonna waste more time trying to convince you of whats actually going on. BTW have you found those WMD yet?