I’m sure you’ve seen this news item: Most U.S. troops in Iraq support withdrawal, poll finds
Does anyone know how to see the actual poll questions? We only get to see a summary of results.
I guess, for the most part, I’m not specifically trying to question the results, but what the poll says is almost 100% out of line with everything I’ve gathered over the past couple of years. Of course, critics of the invasion of Iraq will just nod their heads say that they’ve known about the propaganda all along, but a few items kind of have ol’ Murdoc scratching his head. First:
The poll, conducted in conjunction with Le Moyne College’s Center for Peace and Global Studies, showed that 29% of the respondents, serving in various branches of the armed forces, said the U.S. should leave Iraq “immediately,” while another 22% said they should leave in the next six months.
More than a quarter really think we should pull out completely and immediately? If you say so, but I’ve got to say that I’m a bit skeptical.
85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”
This goes back to the old debate, and I’ve got to say that I don’t know a single serviceman or servicewoman who thinks we invaded Iraq to retaliate for Saddam’s role in 9/11. Now, I don’t know an awful lot of them, and maybe I know all of them who know that no one said Saddam was involved in 9/11. I find this to be a very, very curious result.
“Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there,” said Pollster John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. “Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein.”
I understand that this is a report on what the troops think and doesn’t reflect facts. But I would swear that this poll seems to almost completely fit in line with how anti-war/Liberal/defeatist/BDS-suffering folks have been trying to rewrite recent history. Anyone that paid any attention knows that the goal was the removal of Saddam Hussein’s regime and the disarmament of Iraq, including the destruction of any WMD stockpiles or programs that the UN had not been able to verify as gone. There wasn’t some big “switch” where all of a sudden regime change and democracy became primary reasons where they hadn’t been before.
All of this is quite debatable, due to the fact that we’re talking about opinions of individuals who may or may not be aware of many of the facts surrounding the given reasons for invading or staying in Iraq. But one final result just plain sounds UNBELIEVABLE to Murdoc:
Four in five said they oppose the use of such internationally banned weapons as napalm and white phosphorous.
80% of US troops think we should not use Napalm and WP? Sorry. Murdoc is calling “bullshit” on this one. Until I see the actual question and have a chance to rethink my position in light of that information, I must go on record as stating that this result is an out-and-out L-I-E.
If the question was “should the US use napalm and WP on civilians” or “should the US use weapons that are banned by treaties we’ve signed”, maybe the 80% number is believable. But a “Should the US refrain from using weapons like napalm and WP” would get a result (by Murdoc’s estimates) in the low negative teens range. As in, a few respondents would answer “Not only should we NOT refrain, we should drop it twice. Or four times.”
Give me a break.
John at the Officer’s Club also is a bit skeptical. Murdoc freely acknowledges that, since he’s not in uniform, he might not have even the slightest clue.
John’s in uniform.
UPDATE: More here. I contacted Zogby via their website looking for the actual survey questions. I don’t expect an answer.
UPDATE: Much more, including the actual questions, here.