Iraq, and the people of Iraq, are today better off than they were in the past

[Texan]

Polls in Iraq
A number of public opinion polls have been taken in Iraq since the fall of the Saddam regime to measure the primary concerns of Iraqis as well as their level of optimism. While the validity of the results in a country whose people are unfamiliar with freedom of speech may be questionable, the polls reflect a sense of optimism about the future.

In one poll, the Saudi daily Okaz asked people if they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: "Iraq, and the people of Iraq, are today better off than they were in the past." 66 percent of the respondents "strongly agreed" and another 17 percent "agreed." Only 17 percent disagreed. One hundred percent of respondents disagreed with the statement: "It is possible that Saddam Hussein will return to govern Iraq because he is preferable to the Western coalition." In analyzing the results of the poll, the paper concluded that a majority of Iraqis are pessimistic about the conditions in the short term, but optimistic about the long-term situation. [1]

Link

[wu_trax]

are you insane????
ofc saddam cant return, but its just as obvious that the us will fail to establish 'whatever kind of goverment they want' in iraq.
i just read a poll which said that most of the iraqis see the us-forces as occupying forces, not as liberators.
most of them also dont want a dmocracy but a religious state like iran.

[Bloomers III]

i would agree they are slightly better off. they have more civil rights and political freedom (yeah i still play NationStates) than before and hopefully will do 4evah. But whether they appreciate or can utilise these rights is another question, and I don't think they can. They don't have a government let alone a democracy, there is little law and order and now the terrorists and extremists are arriving in their droves. Before Saddam at least this didn't happen and the people had running water, electricity. So anyway what I would say is that they aren't better off yet , but with time it's going to happen.

[G_frog]

Good news, questioning the polls' formulation seems churlish at this point.

i do hope you're not trying to make a crude ends/means argument with that post though.

[wu_trax]

btw, after gulf war I it took saddam 3 month to repair the water- and electricity supply, the us didnt manage to do that in 6 month, with a lot of more resources. makes you wonder how happy people are now.

anyway, if the iraqies really are that happy about their new rights, wouldnt the number of attacks decrease instead of increase? and wouldnt there be more cooperation with the us-troops? even some of the shiites (spell?) turn against the us now, and you should be happy that the tukrs were wise enough not to send in troops or there would be trouble with the kurds aswell.

[Bloomers III]

the attacks aren't carried out by disgruntled iraqi citizens, they are carried out by extremists who would still carry out attacks if there was running water, electricity, a new government and little US presence. these people attack the Red Cross and UN, they're attacking Westerners because they think it's Jihad or something silly like that.

i think the lack of cooperation is the americans fault, the British have been a lot more successful in this issue and there is a big difference between law and order etc. in the north and south.

i don't think describings iraqis as shites is very nice

[wu_trax]

but would the support for them be the same? these people need some support, you cant just hide in the dessert or whatever.
those few foreign terrorists are not the big problem, ofc they can do some damage, but they are easy to find (different langauge, no family to hide them, etc.)
saddams people are the problem, and those few extremists out of southern iraq (then, how the hell do you spell this group of people?). they have intelligence, they know the country and they have lots of weapons. all they need to do is create some chaos and wait until bush runs out of troops / money.

[Bloomers III]

the only group i know that begins sh is shia muslims, but i expect that's splet wrong and isn't what you mean.

saddam's people are a problem and until they are gone (or as close as that can be achieved) then progress can happen. the americans can divert resources from defending iraq from these people to establishing a democratic iraqi administration. this won't be easy and will probably still take years.

the people in the south who are getting angry are doing so because of the slow progress, but progress will be slow and they have to accept that. if they start creating problems for the americans then the progress will all but stagnate, which means the problem they are angry at will just worsen because of what they're doing.

[Bunga]

There's the shi'ite.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Bunga

There's the shi'ite.

thanks.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Bloomers III

saddam's people are a problem and until they are gone (or as close as that can be achieved) then progress can happen. the americans can divert resources from defending iraq from these people to establishing a democratic iraqi administration. this won't be easy and will probably still take years.

the problem is: they cant really defend against these people. if they take a somewhat harder approach they only make more enemies (the family or clan counts a lot of there) and if they dont they will be unable to fight these people.
then we have the humilating way the us treats its prioners and the fact that the us troops rather shoot than think.
no, sorry, i dont see any way at all for this to work out, no matter how long bush plans to keep troops in iraq. even now the us creates more enemies every day.

the people in the south who are getting angry are doing so because of the slow progress, but progress will be slow and they have to accept that. if they start creating problems for the americans then the progress will all but stagnate, which means the problem they are angry at will just worsen because of what they're doing.

and you think people think this through rationally?

[JonnyBGood]

You should see some of the other polls heh.







After having read that article in detail and checked the sources I'd like to point out that the poll you quoteed was in a newspaper on July 14th. Heh.

[W]

Noone can say ANYTHING about the long term results. There are too many variables, too many groups with their own agendas that still has the power to change things. And as everywhere else, ignorance rules the people.

[Texan]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

After having read that article in detail and checked the sources I'd like to point out that the poll you quoteed was in a newspaper on July 14th. Heh.

That must be why it seemed so familiar.

[Texan]

Originally Posted by wu_trax

btw, after gulf war I it took saddam 3 month to repair the water- and electricity supply, the us didnt manage to do that in 6 month, with a lot of more resources. makes you wonder how happy people are now.

snipped

As of last week Iraq was producing more electricity than under the Saddam regime. You probably did not see that reported in European media (or U.S. media for that matter), because the media have no reason to tell us any positive stories out of Iraq.

BTW, I don't work for NATO anymore. I work for the U.S. Army Corps of Enginers. The COE currently has a contract to help restore Iraqi electricity.

[Nodrog]

Absolutely meaningless; you dont have a clue what kind of newspapers carried out the survey, the sample group, or anything else you'd require to form a semi-informed interpretation of the results. Also, the question formulation is stupid in most cases:

" Iraqis are optimistic. Seven out of 10 say they expect their country and their personal lives will be better five years from now.
While they may not like being under occupation, 59 percent of respondents would give the occupation forces and, by extension, the CPA, the additional time of one to two years to initiate political and economic reforms."

[Nusselt]

look doods why not go to first hand sources on the low down with all the shenanigans in I-raq. Theres quite a few blogs on the net, obvioulsly Salam pax is the daddy but he has linked to other blogs.

[wu_trax]

Originally Posted by Texan

As of last week Iraq was producing more electricity than under the Saddam regime. You probably did not see that reported in European media (or U.S. media for that matter), because the media have no reason to tell us any positive stories out of Iraq.

but you and your army friends also use far more electricity than before. because of that there is less for the iraqies.

[inf]

The United States value of democracy makes me laugh.

[SilverSmoke]

According to an Iraqi collegue of mine (he lived in Bagdad during the first Gulfwar, half his family still lives there) people in general are not really enthousiastic about the yanks in their country but they're very happy that Saddam has been removed and attacks like we hast last week (the 34 casualties one) is nothing compared to the created tension, fear of violence and opression by Saddam's regime.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally Posted by Nodrog

Absolutely meaningless; you dont have a clue what kind of newspapers carried out the survey, the sample group, or anything else you'd require to form a semi-informed interpretation of the results.

While I agree, the newspaper is given in the sources (As Jonny has rightfully ridiculed). Okaz is a vaguely pro-government newspaper in the land of high journalistic standards and openess, Saudi Arabia.

I'm unsure of their political colours (if such a distinction can be made in such a publication) but they did call on Saddam Hussein to step down before the conflict so it's not exactly surprising they are now confirming their pre-war opinion.

Of course, in all of this it's amusing that the Americans are comforting themselves by comparisons with Saddam, who it's generally agreed was an appalling tyrant.

[Vermillion]

Originally Posted by Texan

As of last week Iraq was producing more electricity than under the Saddam regime.

For the first time since the war, and that state of affairs lasted a total of 17 hours.

[W]

Originally Posted by Dante Hicks

Of course, in all of this it's amusing that the Americans are comforting themselves by comparisons with Saddam, who it's generally agreed was an appalling tyrant.

[inf]

Maybe the americans shouldn't have supported Saddam in the first place.

[IncubusGod]

Originally Posted by Bloomers III

the attacks aren't carried out by disgruntled iraqi citizens, they are carried out by extremists who would still carry out attacks if there was running water, electricity, a new government and little US presence. these people attack the Red Cross and UN, they're attacking Westerners because they think it's Jihad or something silly like that.

Your a muppet. Its not jihad driven,there are some attacks like that however its a smart military tactic that is being driven,planned and carried out by the old guard of the army and militas.

The tactic is this: Attack the americans to bump up casulaty lists and whip up dissent back in the US.
Attack all international agencies and aid agencies in Iraq and make it impossible for them to do their relief work.
Harry the reconstruction work as much as possible.
Bring the indisciminate killing by the americans to the worlds attention.

This way they hope to force the US out by political means back home or through causing an uprising against the occupying forces by the general population allowing them to sieze more power in the vaccum.

Its not necessarily to return Sadam Hussain to power, its to get them and all their cronies who were running the place over the last few years back into power.

If that doesnt arrise then they may switch tactic to prolonging the attacks as long as possible in order to make the US and British administrations to opt for a more international spreading of control or even UN intervention. That way they can press their political muscle when elections take place and then when no-one is looking in a few years,take power.
It's happened before in that country,why cant it happen again.

And this stupid idea that everything will work out in the long run is ludicrous.
I mean, Afganistan anyone? That country is so unstable now there is no rule of law pretty much everywhere outside of Kabul. Its now the largest producer of drugs in the world. Way to go america.