« Bush and Abu Risha | Main | People and Power: Al-Anbar »

September 10, 2007

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c391553ef00e54eef533d8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference What Iraqis Think, Again:

» Public Opinion in Iraq from Political Animal
PUBLIC OPINION IN IRAQ....So what do Iraqis think of the surge? Marc Lynch summarizes a recent poll of 2,000 residents:The BBC/ABC/ NHK survey, conducted in all 19 provinces during August, finds that 70% of Iraqis believe that security has deteriorated... [Read More]

Comments

akinoluna

I'm not a regular reader, just happened to stumble by today via toot reads. Those statistics are very telling...too bad most Americans won't bother to pay any attention to them.

Observation

You're getting a little sloppy in your rush to comment on Iraq...

Saleh Mutlaq's National Dialogue Group was never part of Maliki's cabinet...

I also think that your Iraq analysis suffers from a lack of "deep knowledge" about Iraq and its people...

mullah cimoc

mullah cimoc say him iraki guerilla fighter just to waiting, then to attacking.

him iraki fighter calling this the "rope the slope", kind of slur base on shape of head of ameirki.

ameriki need reading chairman mao tse tung 3 volume treatise.

Andrew R.

It seems to me that there's no contradiction at all between Sattar et al working with the U.S. recently and the fact that prett much all of the Sunni Iraqis want the U.S. gone. After all, most Anbaris probably don't want to have an AQI/ISI strong enough to take over once the Americans are gone.

aardvark

Observation - who said Salah Mutlak was part of Maliki's cabinet? Are you sure you're commenting on the right blog?

Observation

Sunni bloc returns to Iraqi parliament - Yahoo! News
.. but not to Maliki government.

Explain that...

aardvark

Well, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here - the headline of the article, "Sunni bloc returns to Iraqi parliament", leaves in doubt the specific Sunni bloc in question. The context, a few days ago, was one in which there was much speculation that the Tawafuq Bloc would agree to a face saving compromise ahead of the Petraeus/Crocker report and return to the government. The tag was only meant to signal the limited importance of the Parliamentary return, which had nothing to do with the government level crisis on which most people at the time were focused. I could have been more specific in the tag, but I wasn't. Sorry about that.

bb

The demerit of the BBC/ABC poll has always been that, on the face of it, its sample overweights the Sunni Arabs and underweights the Kurds.

For instance, in the question as to whether the respondants consider attacks on Coalition forces to be "acceptable" the poll gives a 57% affirmative, breaking it down to 93% of Sunni Arabs questioned, 50% of Shiites and 5% of Kurds.

Going on the known demographics of Iraq - Sunni Arabs 20% Kurds 20% Shia 60% - the 57% affirmative reported indicates the poll sample weighted the Sunni Arabs between 28 and 30% and the Kurds between 10 and 12%.

If the sample had followed the 60/20/20 demographic the "acceptable" vote would have been slightly under than 50% and the "unacceptable" slightly more than 50.

Ergo, the polls are skewed to Sunni Arab negative reactions on every question.

The polls are useful in indicating trends, but that's about all.

A thought

Choosing military options based on opinion polls is like choosing a Pope based on his golf handicap. The war is internationally unpopular; goes with the territory...

glasnost

Marc,

I'm an avid reader of michaeltotten.com.

He spent a week in Iraq in late July and has an awful lot of pictures of Iraqis that sure seem happy that US troops are there. Sunnis, at that. He has an ample description of near-universal, *extremely* positive Iraqi Sunni reaction to US forces - something he contrasts in some ways with Baghdad and the belts.

I have a lot of respect for both sites, as both seem to be square dealers, but Mike's public opinion samples varies head-explodingly from these polls.

Can you give me any insight into this? I know Ramadi has about 500K people and the Iraqi sunni population is .. 5 million or so. The Ramadi experience should move these numbers all by itself...
Something is wrong.

gary

An Iraqi man explained -- and a Democratic Senator and a Republican Congressman confirmed -- the reason Mahdi is worse than Al-Qaeda, is Sadr/Mahdi wants a *UNIFIED* Iraq, which he stated, while Al-Qaeda wants a separatist Iraq, separate religious enclaves.

Well, not only Al-Qaeda.
So does Malaki and Hakim and the Badr Organization.

see “Graham: We Must Defeat Militias ‘Backed By Iran’ By Siding With Militia Backed By Iran”

see Ron Paul debating Patraeus on Youtube (I'm not voting for Ron Paul)

see "Iran thanks the brave American soldiers!"

The US-backed Iraqi govt is more pro-Iranian than Sadr, most pro-Iran group in the country.
Malaki and Hakim are Separatists, for a separate "Shiastan", aligned with Iran.

Who else is for Separation?
Bush.
Israel's "Clean Break" strategy.
the Trilateralists.
Senator Biden, who already proposed to break up Iraq in 2007.

Who's for a unified Iraq?
The majority.
Sadr/Mahdi.
The elected Legislature.

Who is the US bombing? Sadr.

The strategy all along was to divide and conquer Iraq, NOT to heal it, NOT to keep it together. To use ethnic cleansing to divide it, then divide it politically.

That's what's been happening, because that's what was SUPPOSED to be happening. No mistakes, not the kind people are saying.

Sadr/Mahdi wants EVERYONE out of Iraq, including Iranians, the US, the Brits, Israeli intell, and the UN.

Sadr/Mahdi IS a threat --- to the real plan of separation.

The comments to this entry are closed.

google analytics


Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Blog powered by Typepad