You are herecontent / Pentagon Conducts Bogus Poll to Distort Iraq Opinion

Pentagon Conducts Bogus Poll to Distort Iraq Opinion


Yesterday at the Department of Defense press briefing ( ), Secretary Rumsfeld and General Richard Myers touted new poll results of Iraqis that claim to demonstrate that the insurgency is losing political steam. What they didn’t reveal about the poll is that it surveyed only those Iraqis who already despise the insurgent activity and have actively worked against it.

Here’s what Rumsfeld said yesterday when asked whether he truly understands the nature of the insurgency:

Q: “If I can take you back to your opening statement when you — actually, General Myers made similar references to the failings of the insurgency, including their failure to garner public support. And yet, this far into the operation, the insurgency has managed to sustain itself. Does this suggest a lack of understanding on your part on what the insurgency is about, who they are, the durability of their effort?


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

The Bush team is now saying the US can see itself withdrawing-at least partially-from Iraq when and if the Iraqis are able to contain the insurgency that is fueled by the US presence. That is a classic oxymoron.

The chances that such an outcome will occur while the US remains in Iraq are nil. It is hard to see your way out of a situation if you will not face the real nature of the situation. Bush and Blair have thoroughly confused the issues in their own minds, and they are increasingly at odds with the people of their countries. But the tragedy of it is that training Iraqis to kill or punish, i.e., imprison other Iraqis, or Afghans to kill or confine other Afghans is merely setting these societies against themselves.

The situation needs to be turned as quickly as possible into one in which the US is not fighting the Iraqis, and neither are Iraqis. Expecting the Iraqis to bludgeon themselves into a democratic society is preposterous. The present conflict can only be resolved by turning the whole matter over to a UN peacekeeping force that does not contain any Americans, and that does not continue to set the Iraqi people against each other.

That is absolutely right. The peacekeepers should be from non-neighboring Arab, south Asian, and other predominently Muslim nations
as Jaun Cole has written. This is probably the only way peace will have a chance in Iraq. The dilemna of the Sunnis will not be solved by this method. However, it would deprive the Sunni insurgents of the justification of foriegn occupation if only UN troops from disinterested countries were involved. If there were no neocolonial
occupation they would lose most of their popular support and have to seek a political solution.

Here, Here! I hate to put it this way, but give it another 10 years. We have exploded so many depleted uranium weapons around Irag and Afghanistan (over 3000 tons in Iraq, as far as the best information I can find indicates) that these places are now uninhabitable for human life -- for the next few billion years! It will take a while for the effects to show up, in both our troops and in the native populations. There is a well known but little advertised fact about depleted uranium weapons used in the field: over half of the troops that came back from Gulf War I are now chronically ill. This compares to 20% after Vietnam (mostly due to Agent Orange). We used only a relatively small amount of depleted uranium weaponry in Gulf War I, and mostly in the desert. They call the widely varied illnesses that resulted the "mysterious" Gulf War Syndrome. Right! Our military should be sued until they don't exist anymore.

That's a good point, from an angle not readily apparent, about the U.S. setting Iraqi's against each other. It can come to no good, and is in effect reinforcing deep hatred of one side against the other that will undermine any attempt toward good will--effectively setting in place a self perpetuating conflict, similar to gang wars that never end due to long held animosities and revenges over prior battles.

In most wars, one side loses and goes home, out of the territory. In this case, if there is ever a declared loser, they will remain on the same turf, regroup, and the diehards will try again and again to avenge what they perceive as earlier wrongs done to them by the "good guys" that we are arming and training to put them down.

The Iraqi's have age old conflicts to begin with, and we are not helping that situation but are instead laying the foundation for at best protracted Iraqi civil war if we ever do exit from there.

The Pentagon wages war on us with its propaganda war.

I think I have figured out what I want to do next in my life. I was thinking of building a huge amusement park similar to Disney World in Florida. But I want to make this park much more than the one in Florida. Now is the question as to where to build this humongous park. Hmmmm I have had many thoughts on where to build it. Hey I know of 1600 acres near Crawford Texas that I could build it. The only thing is there is someone that owns the 1600 acres right now. I need to see if this person is willing to sell it. no wait a minute. I could use eminent domain and the kelo case to secure the 1600 acres to build my park (Hooooray for me). I think that will work. I hope George W. Bush does not get to angry at me for taking his ranch to use for an amusement park. I think I also have a name for the park. I will name it “FREEDOM PARK

I love it. I have at least $1.50 in change to help support the cause. (Sorry, my engineering job was recently exported, so I'm a little low on cash right now.) I believe that right next to Freedom Park there should be a display of every type of nuclear weapon that the US has contrived so far, including all these wonderful "depleted uranium" (total misnomer!) shells that are so vital to our government's efforts to dominate the world -- or kill all these damn civilians off, whichever comes first. I mean, hey, if we're going to spend as much on the military as the rest of the world combined, we should at least show it off, rather than hiding it all in underground bunkers!

God help the children. I'm an agnostic myself, but I find myself hoping that there is a god that might step in and help out in this mess we call civilization. Thanks GW, for letting all the angry, vicious, hateful, destructive, profiteering cats out of the bag. We will never forget you, as long as we (might) live.

Good reading for those who still can't see:

Gen. Zinni: 'They've Screwed Up'
Broadcast on Sunday, May 23, 2004 by 60 Minutes / CBS News
by Steve Croft

Retired General Anthony Zinni is one of the most respected and outspoken military leaders of the past two decades.

From 1997 to 2000, he was commander-in-chief of the United States Central Command, in charge of all American troops in the Middle East. That was the same job held by Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf before him, and Gen. Tommy Franks after.


Zinni says Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time - with the wrong strategy. And he was saying it before the U.S. invasion. In the months leading up to the war, while still Middle East envoy, Zinni carried the message to Congress: “This is, in my view, the worst time to take this on. And I don’t feel it needs to be done now.

Phony polls to go along with the phony "freedom walk". I can't wait to see the tee shirt for that thing.

"Of course the people don't want war. But after all, it's the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it's always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it's a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger."

-- Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

"Do they make a condom that protects the soul?"

(quote from the movie "Touch")

We should call in UN peace-keepers and get the uranium clean-up started and we should pay for every last cent of it.

Apparently when Clinton was in the White House, the GOP and Friends felt differently about war...

"You can support the troops, but not the president." - Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"Well, I just think it's a bad idea. What's going to happen is they're going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years." - Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

"Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?" - Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

"The President is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation's armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy." - Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA)

"American foreign policy is now one huge big mystery. Simply put, the administration is trying to lead the world with a feel-good foreign policy." - Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

"If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy." - Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning. . . I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area." - Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today." - Representative Tom Delay (R-TX)

And for the grand finale...

"Victory means exit strategy, and it's important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is." - Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

1. Republican 2. Tom Delay 3. George W. Bush

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.


Support This Site


Get free books and gear when you become a supporter.



Speaking Truth to Empire


Families United


Ray McGovern


Financial supporters of this site can choose to be listed here.



Find the perfect Purple Bridesmaid Dresses for your bridesmaids from




Ca-Dress Long Prom Dresses Canada
Ca Dress Long Prom Dresses on

Buy Books

Get Gear

The log-in box below is only for bloggers. Nobody else will be able to log in because we have not figured out how to stop voluminous spam ruining the site. If you would like us to have the resources to figure that out please donate. If you would like to receive occasional emails please sign up. If you would like to be a blogger here please send your resume.
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Enter the characters shown in the image.