They Really Hate Us

During his opening statement, Rep. Ike Skelton referenced a poll just released today showing that Iraqis don't believe the surge is working. It seems that Skelton, like me, made the mistake of reading The Washington Post's summary of the poll, rather than the BBC writeup which highlights the much more striking fact that "nearly 60% see attacks on US-led forces as justified."

This is something we've seen several times in polls of Iraqi opinion, but it never seems to penetrate. It seems to me that even 10-25 percent of the population actively approving of attacks on American troops might make our mission there impossible. But when an actual majority support killing our soldiers, then how, exactly, are the soldiers supposed to help Iraq's population? It just doesn't make sense, on any level, to think that a giant military deployment can play a constructive role under these circumstances.

Comments

I'm actually surprised it's only 60 percent.

Posted by Ugh | September 10, 2007 1:28 PM

Eventually enough Iraqis will be dead or elsewhere and the ones who remain will like us. Then, we'll have won.

We'll win! We'll win! Oh, joy! Winning! It's a thrill like no other!

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | September 10, 2007 1:31 PM

The fact that most Iraqis want to kill us proves that the surge is working.

Oh no, come to think of it, I misspoke.

The poll proves that Al Qaida is manipulating the polls.

No, umm, maybe the fact that most Iraqis want to kill us proves that dead-enders at the BBC are deliberately leaking unfavorable information in an attempt to discredit our winning policy.

Oh no, I forget, the Brits are part of the Coalition of the Willing.

Come to think of it, what ever happened to the Coalition of the Willing? We haven't heard from them in quite some time. Which probably proves...oh, nevermind!

Yours Crankily,
The New York Crank

Posted by The New York Crank | September 10, 2007 1:42 PM

Well, when you are George Bush and live in your own reality, you don't have to worry about pesky things like "sense."

Posted by Cosmic Philosopher | September 10, 2007 1:47 PM

Oh, winning hearts and minds alright.

Since World War II analogies are so beloved of this war's supporters, I should point out that we occupied Japan and Germany as a block against outside aggression from the Soviets, and were actually popular in those countries for that.

For large sections of Iraqis we're at best a necessary evil against further chaos, at worst merely invaders. We've done next to nothing to combat that image.

DU

Posted by The Mechanical Eye | September 10, 2007 1:53 PM

and then there are the roughly 3M iraqis who have provided their opinion with their feet, by leaving the country. presumably many of them do not, in fact, support attacks on US troops since, by the accounts i've seen, they are largely secular, well-educated professionals and their families, but their departure counts for something, although it too is never discussed.

Posted by howard | September 10, 2007 2:01 PM

I'm no war supporter, but I think there is an extent to which the Iraqis would like it if we could provide security and political reconciliation, but would also like to see US troops killed. Even the most obviously benevolent intervention would generate these kinds of sentiments based on some mixed feelings: yeah, I'd like to see this country come together but at the same time I don't blame anyone who wants to take a shot at those arrogant bastards. 60% may still be a smoking gun. Sometimes the polls in that part of the world just boggle the mind. I've seen some suggesting that a majority of this or that group think the jews were responsible for 9/11. Then you just don't know what to think.

Posted by mpowell | September 10, 2007 2:18 PM

I'm no war supporter, but I think there is an extent to which the Iraqis would like it if we could provide security and political reconciliation, but would also like to see US troops killed.

So, it's sort of like greeting our soldiers with be the deadly poppies from The Wizard of Oz?

Posted by Jeffrey Davis | September 10, 2007 2:25 PM

Even the most obviously benevolent intervention would generate these kinds of sentiments based on some mixed feelings: yeah, I'd like to see this country come together but at the same time I don't blame anyone who wants to take a shot at those arrogant bastards.

You're right that a "benevolent intervention" would still generate these feelings, but much of this could have been assuaged with better management. Obviously competency is not the watchword of this administration. I've been against the war from the start, but I never would have guessed that it would turn into the giant cf it has.

Posted by Cosmic Philosopher | September 10, 2007 2:28 PM

It strikes me as plausible 10% of our own population would approve of strikes on this administration.

Posted by steve duncan | September 10, 2007 2:33 PM

The notion that the U.S. is in Iraq to help the Iraqi people is something called propaganda.

This is quite different from it being something called the truth, although many people seem to have a lot of difficulty telling the difference.

Posted by RLaing | September 10, 2007 4:04 PM

Thoses blues.

Posted by yabonn | September 10, 2007 4:21 PM

Later in the BBC report:

"The number of people wanting coalition forces to leave immediately rose since February's poll but more than half - 53% - still said they should stay until security improved."

That seems like a high amount to me for a foreign occupation force.

Among those who think attacks on foreign troops are justified "This rises to 93% among Sunni Muslims compared to 50% for Shia."

Of course the Sunnis are mad, they were the minority social group in power, oppressing the Shia and Kurds.

Posted by Peter K. | September 10, 2007 4:31 PM

Of course when poll data showed that a startling number of Muslims in Europe supported suicide bombs and terrorism targeting the West, the data was downplayed by liberal apologists. When polls show that a simple majority of Iraqis want us out of Iraq then it is gospel truth. Every interview I have read of an Iraqi in Iraq, with the exception of al Sadr, indicates that they want us to stay. Somewhere in all this is the truth.

Posted by danceswithgoats | September 10, 2007 5:48 PM

"Sometimes the polls in that part of the world just boggle the mind. I've seen some suggesting that a majority of this or that group think the jews were responsible for 9/11."

It always tickles me when people make an implied contrast between those crazy Middle Easterners with their wacky conspiracy theories and all us rational Westerners--you know, the ones who went into Iraq because of the WMD threat, the link between Saddam and Osama, and so on. Not to mention the ease with which Americans buy into every moronic notion that makes us or our allies look good--remember the notion (still believed in some circles) that the Palestinian refugee problem was generated by Arab leaders ordering them out?

Posted by Donald | September 10, 2007 7:25 PM

"Sometimes the polls in that part of the world just boggle the mind. I've seen some suggesting that a majority of this or that group think the jews were responsible for 9/11."

It always tickles me when people make an implied contrast between those crazy Middle Easterners with their wacky conspiracy theories and all us rational Westerners--you know, the ones who went into Iraq because of the WMD threat, the link between Saddam and Osama, and so on. Not to mention the ease with which Americans buy into every moronic notion that makes us or our allies look good--remember the notion (still believed in some circles) that the Palestinian refugee problem was generated by Arab leaders ordering them out?

Posted by Donald | September 10, 2007 7:25 PM

The original political platform, ca. 15,000 BC: "Foreigners Out!".

Posted by Hal | September 10, 2007 11:35 PM

How do you know we are NOT the good guys in Iraq? The Iraqis fought an eight-year war against their neighbor and had the largest army in the Arab world....and yet we can't build one there after 4 years. Vichy regime, anyone? Who wants to "serve" a country that has killed hundreds of thousands of your own people?

A little history may be in order. The Helots fought to be free of the Spartans, not to serve them.

Posted by Matthew | September 11, 2007 2:38 PM

"I've seen some suggesting that a majority of this or that group think the jews were responsible for 9/11."

That's just common sense.

Who benefited the most from the Iraq war (besides Iran)?

Israel. They've got agents up there working to destabilize Iran, and they've other business people up there trying to get a pipeline from Kirkuk to Haifa.

They also got the US to knock off and destabilize on Arab country.

They bombed another nearly into the Stone Age (Lebanon). Now they're trying to get Syria to start a war so they can knock out Syria and finish with Hizballah. And they're agitating for the destruction of Iran (for the hypocritical reason that Iran is supposedly agitating for the destruction of Israel - which Iran has never said.)

So people look at who probably caused 9/11 on the basis of "cui bono"? Who profits?

Answer: The Israelis, otherwise known as "the Jews."

The odds are very good that the Mossad came up with the whole 9/11 plan, fed it to Al Qaeda via some double agents, then had Mossad agents follow the hijackers around for months to make sure it went off without a hitch. We KNOW Mossad knew at the very least that something was up because they warned us - a couple weeks before it went off. of course, which was too short a time to derail the plan and also had the benefit of making it seem they knew nothing before then.

Classic "false-flag" operation in which bin Laden and his boys were basically the "patsies". This is common in intelligence circles. The original World Trade Center bombing was run like that. Middle Eastern country (Syria, Iran, whoever) intelligence agents come in to do the planning and the bomb prep, then some local suckers (like the moron who rented the van who went back for his deposit) are recruited to do the actual operation.

The Mossad ran false flag bombing operations in Egypt against US embassies and the like some years back. They even tried recruiting Palestinians into a fake "Al Qaeda cell" - but got caught by the Palestinian police.

This would be nothing new - except the target was bigger, the operation more complicated (requiring closer cooperation with certain higher ups in the US administration and intelligence agencies to make sure the "patsies" weren't caught too soon) and the payoff much bigger.

So, yeah, "the Jews" (meaning, Mossad and the Israeli government and the Zionist neocons, not your ordinary garden variety Jews like Winona Ryder) were behind 9/11.

That may not be how the Middle East sees it, of course, due to heavier anti-Semitic propaganda but basically it's correct if you follow the "cui bono" line and realize that "the Jews" in the Middle East means - Israel.

Posted by Richard Steven Hack | September 11, 2007 10:38 PM