What are people's opinions here about Iraq, really?

[Leopolds Ghost]

Iraq has all but been forgotten in the space of the last 12-15 months.

Now, to me, this is yet more proof of Americans' (liberal and conservative) fervent
wish to forget the past, fervent refusal to reconcile contradictory information and
our fervent belief in perpetual American greatness and moral standing as a birthright
instead of through action, as a given instead of through remembrance of past mistakes,
without paying the cost of past actions. All that matters is we marry a new prince,
and the kingdom will be OK.

On the other hand, it could be that a majority of DUers always thought opposition to
the war was overblown: They are pleased with our military success and have no problem
continuing occupation.

If Iraq resumed revolting against our presence 10 years from now, as happened to the Brits,
many johhny-come-latelies here and there would be first in line to "tsk-tsk" the "ungrateful"
Iraqis, like we are doing to Japan (whom the Administration yesterday called "the main problem
in Asia, not China" because of the new Japanese govt's desire for us to reduce our presence in Okinawa.)

Talk me out of it, DUers. What are your opinions on Iraq?

Guess which answer the Administration picked? The second-to-last one.

That's right.

The Administration recently instructed our generals in Iraq to pressure Maliki to prevent the Iraqi
parliament from scheduling a vote on full and unconditional US withdrawal within 12 months, because
the Administration (thanks to the Sec. State) is committed to a permanent "over the horizon" troop
presence in Iraq. It's what we came there for. Permanent troop presence. No Iraqi vote allowed.

You read about that in your local newspaper, right?

[NRaleighLiberal]

1. Other. It was an immortal war based on a lie. Bush is a murderer. Time to leave.

Now.

[DKRC]

2. +1

Thank you. I was looking for that option.

:thumbsup:

[sinkingfeeling]

3. +2

[supernova]

5. You mean "immoral?"

"Immortal" means it will never die. Which I don't think any of us wants. ;-)

I agree with you, though.

the Iraq War is completely immoral.

[Toasterlad]

23. Looking More and More Immortal Every Day.

[Iggo]

6. Yeah, I was looking for "I was against it then..."

"...and I'm against it now."

[Leopolds Ghost]

10. But lots of people are picking the pro-occupation options. That's what I was trying to point out.

Nobody's going to admit they think the current occupation is going swell if you come out swinging at them rhetorically in the poll question.

Just like nobody in Western PA (or the central yuppie districts of wealthy, ethnically cleansed "progressive" cities) is going to admit that they don't like to associate with black people, even if they vote for one. But they don't.

We're outnumbered.

A large majority of Dems out there seem to be willing to forgive and forget so long as "our boys" are "kicking ass" and "our president" is taking credit for it.

I always felt opposition to the war was a mile wide and an inch deep amongst these pro-occupation "sensible centrists".

Clinton got 50% of the primary, remember? She never stopped supporting the war and demanded a say in ensuring permanent bases in Iraq, which is WHY WE INVADED that country.

Permanent bases mean a puppet state that is more or less under our umbrella. Most Dems (and of course all Republicans) have no problem with that, unfortunately.

They only opposed the war when US soldiers were dying.

[niyad]

7. *2-- we never had any business being there, get out now.

[conflictgirl]

35. This. All of the options seemed pro-war.

I didn't suppport it then, still don't. I don't want to send troops anywhere else instead either.

[Iggo]

4. Fervent. (n/t)

[Leopolds Ghost]

8. Currently this poll is rated less than zero, and a majority added up are in favor of the occupation.

Seems I touched a nerve here.

[Leopolds Ghost]

11. Ok, hopefully the poll will pick up more votes for the anti-war options.

The progressives I talk to on the street, here in deep blue territory, consistently pick the pro-occupation options when I ask.

That tells me there's a groundswell of apathy among people who may prefer not to vote if they see a bunch of us anti-occupation folks clustered together.

(or worse, supposedly ultra-liberal people I know look at me cross-eyed for "obsessing over Iraq",

which is the in-person equivalent of down-voting this poll.)

Then there's the lack of any groundswell of criticism the media for ignoring the continued US occupation of Iraq.

[RaleighNCDUer]

12. 'a majority add up are in favor of the occupation'

which is easy to get when you leave out "it's past time for us to go".

Of all your questions, only ONE was an anti-occupation choice, and that wasn't even a clear "get out now", but weaseled "what's left to protect".

Seems you set it up for the answer you wanted to see.

[Leopolds Ghost]

18. No, you've got it EXACTLY WRONG. Center-leftists keep saying they are not represented in these polls

I tried hard to avoid mocking pro-war arguments in the poll questions.

However, I have heard EVERY SINGLE ONE of these arguments parroted by
EVERY SINGLE DEM on TV and EVERY SINGLE so-called progressive I meet on
the street here in the DC area... including affluent young professionals
who moved here to "get involved" after the election.

People on DU kept saying they weren't represented in these polls, that
the "sensible centrist" options were being left out.

I'd like to establish whether

A. People even care about this issue anymore!

B. Do they no longer care because we feel it's hopeless, or is it that
there are an awful lot of people who actually don't have a problem
with permanent occupation so long as "our boys" aren't bleeding?

Seems to me you're turning up your nose at the very real possibility of
darkness in the American soul.

We have a long and storied history of not opposing permanent occupation
of countries we supposedly didn't support the invasion of.

See: The Phillippines, and now Japan -- the Administration is attacking
Japan in the media for "reneging" on permanent basing commitments made
"to contain China" -- as if our corporate masters wanted to contain
our most favored nation trading partner -- in the news media THIS WEEK.

[RaleighNCDUer]

25. Nonetheless, look at the replies in this thread that say they didn't find

their choice on your list - We should have never been there in the first place and we need to leave, yesterday.

It looks to me like you are deliberately skewing the poll to show that even on DU we all support EMPIRE.

And that is fucking nonsense.

[Leopolds Ghost]

30. What I want to do is get an accurate reading. The arguments for out now are straightforward

The arguments for staying are all over the map.

I just want to know if anyone agrees with them.

Because all I hear anymore from a lot of folks
I know, is how it's a dead issue. And none of
the blogs really dwell on the subject,

Even when the Administration does something crazy
like send our generals to prevent an Iraq vote on
early withdrawal, as the Post mentioned on its
front page a couple weeks ago, it doesn't get talked about.

[HopeHoops]

9. Fuck it! We didn't belong there in the first place and we don't belong there now!

Bring the troops home today - ALIVE!

[rrneck]

13. We wouldn't be having this conversation

if Iraq wern't sitting on top of a sea of oil. If we stayed there and nationalized the oil as a publicly owned resource all those troops would suddenly have important business elsewhere.

[Leopolds Ghost]

17. The current and previous Admin (hell, the current and previous Party in power)

Both fervently support DE-nationalizing and privatizing the oil in Iraq AND Iran,

and ensuring that the people that submit the winning bid are US-friendly corporations (or should I say, corporations that the US is owned by?)

and are willing to go to war again if necessary to prevent Iraq's or Iran's oil or any other oil in the region from being RE-nationalized.

And that is a fact... bank on it.

It's what we came there for... that, and basing rights.

And that is an uncomfortable fact that many people on the street here in the US don't seem to understand or care about.

[ipfilter]

14. The Iraq war was a sham from the very begining

and was started to satisfy the blood lust of the rabid RW base after 9/11 and the neocons. It was the tipping point of my conversion and realization that I was actually a liberal at heart. The act of invading and destroying a sovereign country was enough for them to lose me as a voter for the rest of my life. I will do everything I can to undermine and discredit that party of blood thirsty murders and lairs until the day I die.

[Leopolds Ghost]

20. What we have to do is win over fellow progressives / Dems / indies

And convince them that Iraq is not a "dead issue", it's part and parcel of a live one.

We need to either do the right thing on Iraq or stop pretending it's no longer there...

I am very much afraid that if pressed, Obama or the more progressive Dems would come
out in favor of the occupation "now that it's going better" for want of being attacked
by "sensible centrists" from within.

The Administration has instructed our generals to do "everything possible" to prevent
an Iraqi national vote on whether to kick US troops out of Iraq (all troops) a year early.

[Leopolds Ghost]

15. Could someone recommend this poll so it gets more attention?

I was trying to do two things with this poll:

** Give center-left Dems a fair sampling of arguments (specious or otherwise,
these are all considered legitimate arguments by many people I meet) for
continuing current Bush-era policies in Iraq so as to prove whether there is a
"silent majority of sensible centrists" who are "not represented in polls"

that attract us anti-war voters like bees to honey,

as I kept hearing "sensible" DUers say that they were not being represented
in these polls, back before it became a verboten topic,

as it now seems to be given that the Administration and the media clearly
feel it is a dead issue and therefore side with the "sensible centrists".

If I only selected anti-war options I would have been downvoted by the centrists
for criticising the current Administration. You can't win by talking about this
issue!

** Prove that progressive Dems (or at least the blogosphere) are not "distracted
by the shiny" like the general populace, and still care enough about Iraq to
focus on the subject, and are not sufficiently wedded to current US policies
in Iraq as to criticise or down-vote people or even bringing up the subject,
that we're still willing to talk about it.

[hfojvt]

21. it would be a better poll

if it had a "troops out now" option. Are you trying to find out where the centrists on DU stand, or where DU stands?

Do you think centrists dominate here? I think the vast majority here would support a 'troops out now' option.

[Leopolds Ghost]

32. I tried to add one in response to this criticism, but editing period had expired.

Frankly, it slipped my mind... I figured the troops out now option was covered by the ones most people voted for. My bad.

I was trying to give centrist Dems an opportunity to state their case, yes, because at least here in the DC area there seem to be a hell of a lot of "sensible centrists" moving into town since the election (and a heck of a lot of them seem to be coming here for jobs, jobs, jobs) and telling leftists to go take a flying leap, and I was wondering if that was true all over.

What they're always saying is that the "sensible arguments get drowned out" by "people who like to rant and rave".

So I wanted to give them a fair hearing... I didn't want to post an anti-war poll and get accused of not trusting the Obama administration to do the right thing in Iraq...

I've heard similar arguments on DU, at various times, too...

[Leopolds Ghost]

33. Another option missing is "don't believe MSM. most folk haven't changed their mind on Iraq"

It could well be that MSM are driving the decision to avoid discussing Iraq,
even pressuring shows like Olbermann not to "obsess over a dead issue."

Have Americans really stopped opposing our presence there?

If you listened to MSM (or the Washington Post, which never stopped cheerleading
for the war) you'd believe we "won the war" and must now use Iraq as a model for
Afghanistan. And an awful lot of politicians believe the conventional wisdom...

If the populace at large don't learn from our mistakes, etc. etc.

[hfojvt]

36. well your poll did not get many responses

I think a 'leave now' option would have pulled in a lot more, but perhaps even on DU, Iraq has sorta dropped off the radar now that we are not losing 3 or 4 of our soldiers every day and thus the M$M is hardly reporting anything about it.

[Echo In Light]

16. PNAC, and their 9/11, ensured the pre-arranged plans abroad and domestically were given the 'go'

[slackmaster]

19. Pottery Barn

We broke it, we have to pay for it.

[Toasterlad]

24. Forever?

At what point does our obligation end?

More importantly, how is our being there helping anyone?

[bvar22]

28. Pottery Barn metaphor is inaccurate.

"Bull in a China Shop" is more suitable.
You can't repair the China Shop until the Bull (US Military) is removed.

[mvd]

22. We should have been out of Iraq long ago IMO

So where I stand now is clear..

[HamdenRice]

26. You left out: "I oppose the Iraq war and am grateful to the Obama administration for ending it."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=8701234&mesg_id=8701234

US undertaking largest withdrawal of troops and materiel since Vietnam

Leaving Iraq Is a Feat That Requires an Army

By MARC SANTORA
Published: October 8, 2009

JOINT BASE BALAD, Iraq — There is no more visible sign that America is putting the Iraq war behind it than the colossal operation to get its stuff out: 20,000 soldiers, nearly a sixth of the force here, assigned to a logistical effort aimed at dismantling some 300 bases and shipping out 1.5 million pieces of equipment, from tanks to coffee makers.

It is the largest movement of soldiers and matériel in more than four decades, the military said.

[Leopolds Ghost]

31. You're right, I did leave that (I'm getting flak for putting too many options). Here's my question:

This all sounds well and good that we are quietly leaving.

Nixon quietly left Vietnam and got lots of credit for it (a lot of people voted for him in 1972 on the basis that he had kept his promise to end the war, which was beginning to wind down in 1972). Eisenhower quietly shut down Korea, leaving troops only on the border.

Here's my issue:

A. Why did the Administration send its generals to do everything in their power to convince Maliki to prevent an Iraqi parliament from scheduling a national plebiscite on early (mid-2010) and complete US withdrawal?

Obviously democracy must be a success if we are worried about the popular vote.

B. Is the Admin (or more precisely the Sec. State, since State is the real issue here) willing to give up permanent bases in Iraq, outside of the Kurdish areas that have always been our allies?

[blues90]

27. We should have never been in Iraq in 1991 or ever.

Anyone with the common sense of a fried sidewalk slug knows the entire thing was about oil and the control of it.

The gulf war was bad enough yet clear enough to expose the fact it was all about oil which = corporate interests. Then add to this we starve millions with sanctions then which really amazed me because of all the people who were against this was the shock and awe , just the title of that atack was out right perverted enough let alone it being put on live TV as some sort of video game.

Add to this, beside destroying most of their country even if we pull out today which I am all in favor of, what we leave behind are toxins of dust called depleted uranium.

I really as an american lost much of my respect for many americans who supported this insanity riding around in their cars with the little american flags with this grin of their pridefull ignorant vacant skulls propelling them along.

You can't vote it away or ignore it away or justify it away. How can this ever be repaired now that it has been done, I suppose thousands of years might go by before all of these affects go away, yet that does not help anyone right now does it?

I doubt this admin is weighing these affects but only weighing how to make it go away and still find some sick way of justifing it by projecting it far into the future for someone else to deal with.

[Hissyspit]

29. Why did anyone vote for 'our boys are no longer being killed?' There were fatalities this week.

Opinion is greatly undermined when you don't know what you are talking about.

[Mind_your_head]

34. I didn't vote (although I have an opinion) ..... you neglected to post the obligitory "other"

choice (as so many who want to RAM their ideas ~and ONLY their ideas ~ down our minds)