85% of US soldiers think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11

[CptStern]

In a recent poll of us soldiers in iraq:

* Le Moyne College/Zogby Poll shows just one in five troops want to heed Bush call to stay “as long as they are needed”
* Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there
* 72% Say End War in 2006
* While 58% say mission is clear, 42% say U.S. role is hazy
* 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein.
* Almost 90% think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11, most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks
* Just 24% said that “establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war.
* Asked why they think some Americans favor rapid U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq, 37% of troops serving there said those Americans are unpatriotic
* Four in five said they oppose the use of such internationally banned weapons as napalm and white phosphorous.



The survey included 944 military respondents interviewed at several undisclosed locations throughout Iraq. The names of the specific locations and specific personnel who conducted the survey are being withheld for security purposes. Surveys were conducted face-to-face using random sampling techniques. The margin of error for the survey, conducted Jan. 18 through Feb. 14, 2006, is +/- 3.3 percentage points.


http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

 

[Solaris]

Intresting.

 

[clarky003]

Josh, how misinformed are they.

 

[VictimOfScience]

And 95% of the general public think the war is about oil. (And while that is true, its only true to a small extent insofar as it contributes to the strong-arming of Saudi Arabia.)

This isn't too surprising though, as the troops on the ground aren't supposed to have any sort of idea about the bigger picture anyway--it might be bad for business. :rolling:

 

[CptStern]

ya, it bothers me when people say that we dont have a complete picture that only people who are there truely know what's going on ..well this poll proves that's complete nonsense

 

[VictimOfScience]

ya, it bothers me when people say that we dont have a complete picture that only people who are there truely know what's going on ..well this poll proves that's complete nonsense

No kidding. There are probably only a handful of analysts with extremely good global intel ops that have any clue what is actually going on.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Oh dear.

Most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks

Well that's something at least.

 

[CptStern]

No kidding. There are probably only a handful of analysts with extremely good global intel ops that have any clue what is actually going on.

ya but info is readily available to anyone. The freedom of information act, non-embedded journalism and first hand accounts flesh out what's going on to even the casual researcher ...this isnt the vietnam war, the info is there for anyone to sift through

 

[ComradeBadger]

ya, it bothers me when people say that we dont have a complete picture that only people who are there truely know what's going on ..well this poll proves that's complete nonsense

The people there are the ones who have the proper idea on how things are actually going as opposed to the causes of the war.

 

[CptStern]

how can you say that when the overwhelming majority still think saddam to be behind 9/11? ...why do they believe that when the majority of american civilians dont ...you'd think someone in the military would have set them straight ...I dont believe for a minute the DoD keeps them up to date with the lastest news on what's going on ..that would be counter-productive

 

[VictimOfScience]

the info is there for anyone to sift through

Yeah, but not just anyone can analyze it properly to glean any useful conclusions from it. I hate to generalize, but the general public are morons. Thinking of the intelligence of the average human being is enough to turn my hair white with fright. Then to consider that fully half of the world is even less-intelligent than that is truly an exercise in despair.

This is proven by the fact that I have yet to see any report, be it in the TV news, the radio news, or the print news, that correctly takes all of the information out there and draws any sort of coherent and useful explanation of the events of the past few years, in particular, the Iraq War. People get one, perhaps two, incendiary pieces of information and they jump to conclusions and cause a fuss and the masses react accordingly. Its the same mentality that Iran is using to get attention and "credibility." Yell the craziest thing possible that the most people (whether pro- or con-) will react to. Conspiracy theorists, politicians, government officials, journalists--they all do this and it will never end and the masses will continue to be reactionary mindless pawns incapable of devising for themselves what is happening in the world around them.

I dont believe for a minute the DoD keeps them up to date with the lastest news on what's going on

The DoD has proven quite definitively that they can't even keep themselves properly informed.

 

[CptStern]

I think the media doesnt want to link any of the information together ..they ignored the downingstreet memos, they ignored the 9/11 commissions findings (specifically around "curveball" and the planted evidence that led to the war) and they're ignoring the abuse, rendition, secret prisons etc ..they briefly make an appearance and they're gone. I think many people's pre-conceived notions that their government couldnt possibly do anything wrong allows them carte blanche to do what they please ...I mean, they're not even hiding it anymore

 

[K e r b e r o s]

how can you say that when the overwhelming majority still think saddam to be behind 9/11?

I think what ComradeBadger was trying to say, is that the troops and only the troops know about the true scale of the violence and operations occuring in Iraq.

We might hear from several Conservative or Liberal Web-Blogs plus news sources about beatings, executions etc. but I think, along with ComradeBadger, that only they truely know whats happening over there on the ground. I would believe their assesment over the media's.

 

[CptStern]

I think what ComradeBadger was trying to say, is that the troops and only the troops know about the scale and violence of the operations occuring in Iraq.

yes I realise he was saying that ..but it still doesnt make them an authority on what's really going on because most of their info comes from the DoD ..in more than a few interviews with soldiers I've heard the majority say they're winning in iraq when the opposite is true ..the powder kegs fuse is mere inches from the keg ..just a matter of time

We might hear from several Conservative or Liberal Web-Blogs or news sources about beatings, executions etc. but I think, along with ComradeBadger, that only they truely know whats happening over there on the ground.

in their limited scope I agree ..but to truely understand one must be outside looking in

I dont think so

 

[K e r b e r o s]

..but it still doesnt make them an authority on what's really going on because most of their info comes from the DoD

... but that still does'nt make you an authority on what's really going on in Iraq either. Having access to what they can't have access to, does'nt mean your more informed then them. It probably means that both sides of the front in this case each have more information on a certain topic then the other does.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that they might know more about the violence and the combat operations occuring over there then you, while in trade off, you might see really why their they're while they themselves cannot.

You can't get mad at them for it.

..in more than a few interviews with soldiers I've heard the majority say they're winning in iraq when the opposite is true

So, and your perception is where loosing? Just because you believe its impossible for us to win, does'nt nessecarly mean it won't be achieved in the long run.

..the powder kegs fuse is mere inches from the keg ..just a matter of time

I think it has to be, otherwise the Keg would'nt have the firey spark nessecary to make it explode.

in their limited scope I agree ..but to truely understand one must be outside looking in

But, I would'nt assume your superiority over theirs just yet. To truely understand, one must share between the differing opinions to find the truth that lies in the middle.

 

[gick]

Stern, I think what badger was trying to say was that the troops have a better idea of what is actually happening day to day in Iraq, (ie the combat, interacting with civvies etc). We, on the other hand are better aware of what is going on in the government, and behind the scenes, and are more aware of the motives behind the war.

 

[CptStern]

ya I acknowledged that that was what he meant

 

[Ome_Vince]

Was to be expected.
They are dependant on what "people" tell them, and i doubt officers would tell combat troops "hell we dont know why we are here, nobody does".
In war you need morale, so you tell your troops saddam did it, and thats all they need to hear to get a good morale. :S

 

[CptStern]

yes but the need to boost morale doesnt excuse lying to the people who you're depending on them to get the job done ...they're playing with these kids lives by giving them a false idea of what they're doing there. What happens when they come home and they learn the truth? what happens to the parents who's son comes home in a wooden box because somebody failed to tell him what the real reasons behind the war was? ...to openly promote that saddam was responsible for 9/11 is a sorry injustice to the 3000 + americans who died that day not too mention the 2000+ americans who've died since

 

[K e r b e r o s]

...they're playing with these kids lives by giving them a false idea of what they're doing there. What happens when they come home and they learn the truth? what happens to the parents who's son comes home in a wooden box because somebody failed to tell him what the real reasons behind the war was? ...to openly promote that saddam was responsible for 9/11 is a sorry injustice to the 3000 + americans who died that day not too mention the 2000+ americans who've died since

Perhaps so, but I look it like this: So, Saddams out of power. The very man who supported the "2nd holocaust" of Israel. The very man who fired Scud Missles into Tel-Aviv. The very man who was the physical instigator of the Iran and Iraq war.

The very person who sent 300,000+ soldier's during the Six-Day war into Syria, with hopes of invading and destroying Israel. Now that he's out of power, thats good, but not the reason why we went to Iraq anyway.

Now that Al-Qaeda's appeared in Iraq, why leave? Our war is against terror. The enemy is right there. It would be pointless to leave. After all, is'int it our declared Job to chase terrorists down until none are left standing? Yes? Stupid? Maybe. But it would be pointless to leave now. They're there, where they're. Fight it, and let's see who wins.

 

[Ome_Vince]

yes but the need to boost morale doesnt excuse lying to the people who you're depending on them to get the job done ...they're playing with these kids lives by giving them a false idea of what they're doing there. What happens when they come home and they learn the truth? what happens to the parents who's son comes home in a wooden box because somebody failed to tell him what the real reasons behind the war was? ...to openly promote that saddam was responsible for 9/11 is a sorry injustice to the 3000 + americans who died that day not too mention the 2000+ americans who've died since

I never said it was a good thing, i said it was to be expected :cheese:

 

[CptStern]

Perhaps so, but I look it like this: So, Saddams out of power. The very man who supported the "2nd holocaust" of Israel. The very man who fired Scud Missles into Tel-Aviv. The very man who was the physical instigator of the Iran and Iraq war.

The very person who sent 300,000+ soldier's during the Six-Day war into Syria, with hopes of invading and destroying Israel. Now that he's out of power, thats good, but not the reason why we went to Iraq anyway.

careful now, using that logic there'd be nukes flying over washington

Now that Al-Qaeda's appeared in Iraq, why leave? Our war is against terror. The enemy is right there. It would be pointless to leave. After all, is'int it our declared Job to chase terrorists down until none are left standing? Yes? Stupid? Maybe. But it would be pointless to leave now. They're there, where they're. Fight it, and let's see who wins.

by invading you invited them in ..oh and war on terror has to be the bggest joke coming out of the admin ...how many troops are actively looking for osama? compare that to how many are in iraq ..for god knows what reason

 

[K e r b e r o s]

careful now, using that logic there'd be nukes flying over washington

Least they're not hitting it ... or they might, I dunno a thing about Nuclear Weapons, except that when they work right, they pwn everything.

by invading you invited them in

It only takes an invitation to let a vampire in! :thumbs:

..oh and war on terror has to be the bggest joke coming out of the admin

Joke because it has no outline to success? I agree. But these are things we must test in the field. Every great plan, or poor plan anyway, fails at least once.

...how many troops are actively looking for osama?

First, you have to consider the size of the countries:

Afghanistan is by no means the size of Iraq. It also, is by no means the population of it.

Before the 2nd Gulf War, Saddam boasted the worlds 4th Largest Mechanized Armed Force. With more then 200,000 basic ground and air forces along with the contributing 300,000+ plus men, women, and children that bolstered the ranks of the Elite Republican Guard, 120,000 US Soldiers to Iraq was a just move.

20,000 troops would'nt have lasted nor been able to carry the Firepower capable of repelling such a large army. Afghanistan did not have the will or the military to resist like Iraq, so it inherently justifies 20,000 soldiers, most of them Special Forces anyway, and not the old Cold War Doctrine US Army.

Next, we have to consider the area's they would have to monitor. The US Military Presence in Iraq is outgunned and outnumbered still, and they have to monitor large cities and sparse, wide open terrains that 20,000 Soldiers could'nt commit to.

120,000 would be the proper number to commit for those operations. 20,000 is perfect for Afghanistan, but this depends on the determination of the Insurgents creeping over from Pakistan to Afghanistan to engage US Troops now.

 

[Direwolf]

I remain suspicious of polls in general. While this one seems more accountable than most (the techniques used are stated, along with estimated error), far too often these things end up being misleading to those trying to interpret the results.

That said, supposing the numbers are perfectly representative, I don't really see anything out of the ordinary for wartime soldiers. Go figure that their reasoning and viewpoint is different than ours: they're living in a different world than people who argue on the internet. And even if they have it factually wrong, I'm not gonna hold it against them. No infantryman stormed Normandy to save people from Auschwitz, most did it because they thought the Germans were evil.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Stern, I think what badger was trying to say was that the troops have a better idea of what is actually happening day to day in Iraq, (ie the combat, interacting with civvies etc). We, on the other hand are better aware of what is going on in the government, and behind the scenes, and are more aware of the motives behind the war.

Bingo.

 

[DeusExMachina]

I remain suspicious of polls in general. While this one seems more accountable than most (the techniques used are stated, along with estimated error), far too often these things end up being misleading to those trying to interpret the results.

That said, supposing the numbers are perfectly representative, I don't really see anything out of the ordinary for wartime soldiers. Go figure that their reasoning and viewpoint is different than ours: they're living in a different world than people who argue on the internet. And even if they have it factually wrong, I'm not gonna hold it against them. No infantryman stormed Normandy to save people from Auschwitz, most did it because they thought the Germans were evil.

I think this sums up everything.

 

[dream431ca]

War based on a lie....can't do anything now except complain. But they gotta be smarter than that, to think that Saddam had anything to do with 9/11.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

War based on a lie....can't do anything now except complain.

But I don't think complaining is the right thing to do at this moment. What has that earned us? Not a thing. This Administration has'nt shifted a bit.