4 years on (iraq related)
kitchenknight
4,922 Posts
kitchenknight
4,922 Posts
Comments
I could keep going, but I am getting depressed.
A better day is coming.
I remember as a kid asking my pops if we won the vietnam war. no answer.
I know what to tell my daughter if she ever asks.
Vitamin? Rockadelic?
http://gatheringofeagles.org
Come on. You can't put Eli and Rich in the same camp with those dumbasses.
Eli is a straight-up Zionist neocon. If you read his posts at least he takes the time articulate his side. Rich reads like a Libertarian to me. But again, he takes the time to have real discussion. I disagree a lot, but still like to hear it all.
The guy is certainly heavily implicated but then again he's more or less confessed to everything from the Twin Towers to the St Valentine's Day massacre. However they got it, his confession has more than few holes in it.
Whoa, now - isn't it still unAmerican to show pictures of casualties? *sips crude oil cocktail* You're this close to treason, buddy-boy. *sips crude oil cocktail*
People question you patriotism because youll only picture an american flag when its being set alight or draped over a coffin.
People question your support for the troops because when you reference them at all it is only as sadistic murderers or incompetent cannon fodder.
It's not as if any of you bastards care anyway. The sole purpose of this thread was so all you can have a circle jerk about yourselves.
...
"First, the assumption that the United States could create a liberal, constitutional democracy in Iraq defies just about everything known by professional students of the topic. Of the more than 40 democracies created since World War II, fewer than 10 can be considered truly "constitutional" -- meaning that their domestic order is protected by a broadly accepted rule of law, and has survived for at least a generation. None is a country with Arabic and Muslim political cultures. None has deep sectarian and ethnic fissures like those in Iraq.
Strangely, American political scientists whose business it is to know these things have been irresponsibly quiet. In the lead-up to the March 2003 invasion, neoconservative agitators shouted insults at anyone who dared to mention the many findings of academic research on how democracies evolve. They also ignored our own struggles over two centuries to create the democracy Americans enjoy today. Somehow Iraqis are now expected to create a constitutional order in a country with no conditions favoring it.
This is not to say that Arabs cannot become liberal democrats. When they immigrate to the United States, many do so quickly. But it is to say that Arab countries, as well as a large majority of all countries, find creating a stable constitutional democracy beyond their capacities.
Second, to expect any Iraqi leader who can hold his country together to be pro-American, or to share American goals, is to abandon common sense. It took the United States more than a century to get over its hostility toward British occupation. (In 1914, a majority of the public favored supporting Germany against Britain.) Every month of the U.S. occupation, polls have recorded Iraqis' rising animosity toward the United States. Even supporters of an American military presence say that it is acceptable temporarily and only to prevent either of the warring sides in Iraq from winning. Today the Iraqi government survives only because its senior members and their families live within the heavily guarded Green Zone, which houses the U.S. Embassy and military command.
As Congress awakens to these realities -- and a few members have bravely pointed them out -- will it act on them? Not necessarily. Too many lawmakers have fallen for the myths that are invoked to try to sell the president's new war aims. Let us consider the most pernicious of them.
1) We must continue the war to prevent the terrible aftermath that will occur if our forces are withdrawn soon. Reflect on the double-think of this formulation. We are now fighting to prevent what our invasion made inevitable! Undoubtedly we will leave a mess -- the mess we created, which has become worse each year we have remained. Lawmakers gravely proclaim their opposition to the war, but in the next breath express fear that quitting it will leave a blood bath, a civil war, a terrorist haven, a "failed state," or some other horror. But this "aftermath" is already upon us; a prolonged U.S. occupation cannot prevent what already exists.
2) We must continue the war to prevent Iran's influence from growing in Iraq. This is another absurd notion. One of the president's initial war aims, the creation of a democracy in Iraq, ensured increased Iranian influence, both in Iraq and the region. Electoral democracy, predictably, would put Shiite groups in power -- groups supported by Iran since Saddam Hussein repressed them in 1991. Why are so many members of Congress swallowing the claim that prolonging the war is now supposed to prevent precisely what starting the war inexorably and predictably caused? Fear that Congress will confront this contradiction helps explain the administration and neocon drumbeat we now hear for expanding the war to Iran.
Here we see shades of the Nixon-Kissinger strategy in Vietnam: widen the war into Cambodia and Laos. Only this time, the adverse consequences would be far greater. Iran's ability to hurt U.S. forces in Iraq are not trivial. And the anti-American backlash in the region would be larger, and have more lasting consequences.
3) We must prevent the emergence of a new haven for al-Qaeda in Iraq. But it was the U.S. invasion that opened Iraq's doors to al-Qaeda. The longer U.S. forces have remained there, the stronger al-Qaeda has become. Yet its strength within the Kurdish and Shiite areas is trivial. After a U.S. withdrawal, it will probably play a continuing role in helping the Sunni groups against the Shiites and the Kurds. Whether such foreign elements could remain or thrive in Iraq after the resolution of civil war is open to question. Meanwhile, continuing the war will not push al-Qaeda outside Iraq. On the contrary, the American presence is the glue that holds al-Qaeda there now.
4) We must continue to fight in order to "support the troops." This argument effectively paralyzes almost all members of Congress. Lawmakers proclaim in grave tones a litany of problems in Iraq sufficient to justify a rapid pullout. Then they reject that logical conclusion, insisting we cannot do so because we must support the troops. Has anybody asked the troops?
During their first tours, most may well have favored "staying the course" -- whatever that meant to them -- but now in their second, third and fourth tours, many are changing their minds. We see evidence of that in the many news stories about unhappy troops being sent back to Iraq. Veterans groups are beginning to make public the case for bringing them home. Soldiers and officers in Iraq are speaking out critically to reporters on the ground.
But the strangest aspect of this rationale for continuing the war is the implication that the troops are somehow responsible for deciding to continue the president's course. That political and moral responsibility belongs to the president, not the troops. Did not President Harry S. Truman make it clear that "the buck stops" in the Oval Office? If the president keeps dodging it, where does it stop? With Congress?
Embracing the four myths gives Congress excuses not to exercise its power of the purse to end the war and open the way for a strategy that might actually bear fruit.
The first and most critical step is to recognize that fighting on now simply prolongs our losses and blocks the way to a new strategy. Getting out of Iraq is the pre-condition for creating new strategic options. Withdrawal will take away the conditions that allow our enemies in the region to enjoy our pain. It will awaken those European states reluctant to collaborate with us in Iraq and the region.
Second, we must recognize that the United States alone cannot stabilize the Middle East.
Third, we must acknowledge that most of our policies are actually destabilizing the region. Spreading democracy, using sticks to try to prevent nuclear proliferation, threatening "regime change," using the hysterical rhetoric of the "global war on terrorism" -- all undermine the stability we so desperately need in the Middle East.
Fourth, we must redefine our purpose. It must be a stable region, not primarily a democratic Iraq. We must redirect our military operations so they enhance rather than undermine stability. We can write off the war as a "tactical draw" and make "regional stability" our measure of "victory." That single step would dramatically realign the opposing forces in the region, where most states want stability. Even many in the angry mobs of young Arabs shouting profanities against the United States want predictable order, albeit on better social and economic terms than they now have.
Realigning our diplomacy and military capabilities to achieve order will hugely reduce the numbers of our enemies and gain us new and important allies. This cannot happen, however, until our forces are moving out of Iraq. Why should Iran negotiate to relieve our pain as long as we are increasing its influence in Iraq and beyond? Withdrawal will awaken most leaders in the region to their own need for U.S.-led diplomacy to stabilize their neighborhood.
If Bush truly wanted to rescue something of his historical legacy, he would seize the initiative to implement this kind of strategy. He would eventually be held up as a leader capable of reversing direction by turning an imminent, tragic defeat into strategic recovery.
If he stays on his present course, he will leave Congress the opportunity to earn the credit for such a turnaround. It is already too late to wait for some presidential candidate for 2008 to retrieve the situation. If Congress cannot act, it, too, will live in infamy."
Actually, I have casket-sized American flag hanging on my wall that my father brought home Vietnam, where he had gotten it from a supply seargant as he left Da Nang as a souvenir to remind him of his friends that didn't come home. It means a lot to me personally, and is a reminder of the true cost of war both for those that died and those who survived. I don't think the benefits derived from a war with Iraq are worth the human lives we're so callously trading for them.
But please, go back to telling me about my own feelings on the matter.
i don't believe he could get out of his 4-yr lease on his new Mercedes, so he had to pass on enlisting this time around.
Thanks FB.....I find it ironic that the "if you're not with us you're against us" stereotype thrives amongst the Left who damned Bush for saying/doing the same exact thing.
Putting me in the same box as Dolo on ANY level is about a big an insult as I can imagine.
LW can apologize any time he wants.
My 18 year old brother is in Baghdad training Iraqi police. He's in the Navy.
I didnt think so much misinformation, ignorance, and outright falsities could be packed into a single paragraph.
congrats.
Dude, just shut up already.
still waiting to hear about your family's sacrifice
Shit, he's ex-military? Ex-head of Army intelligence, and he directed the NSA under Ronald Jesus Reagan? This might be kind of hard....
Jimmy Carter? He's history's greatest monster! This guy served under The Great Communicator and The Great Capitulator? That is highly suspect; the former is pure good, while the later is clearly evil.
Shit, that's a good thing, too...c'mon, there's gotta be something else we can smear him with...the Carter thing is a little weak.
BAM! Columbia and Yale? So he's a liberal moonbat academic indoctrinator America hating terrorist commie! Ha, and you lib'ruls were dumb enough to listen to him! You dhimmi-loving idiots!
cos, without taking a position one way or another here, I must say this should never be a prerequisite to espousing an opinion on foreign policy.
that said, what should be prerequisites are basic human compassion b/w an ability to articulately defend your position. dolo seldom displays these. saba does sometimes, but not nearly as often as I'd like to see.
im working on it skip.
I have talked to Rock. I have debated with Rock. I have argued with Rock. I have PM'd Rock. From all that I can tell everyone here, that I am 100% sure that Rock is a LOT older than Dolo!
Iraqis see hope drain away
After 4 years of war, survey finds a nation fragmented by fear
By Susan Page and Omar Salih
USA TODAY
3/19/07
Jobs gone and schools closed. Marriages delayed and children mourned. Markets bombed and clean water in short supply. Speaking freely now a dangerous act.
And hope lost.
Four years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Iraqis describe daily lives that have been torn apart by spiraling violence and a faltering economy. The bursts of optimism reported in a 2004 public-opinion survey taken a year after the invasion and another in 2005 before landmark legislative elections have nearly vanished.
Face-to-face interviews with 2,212 Iraqis ??? a survey sponsored jointly by USA TODAY, ABC News, the British Broadcasting Corp. and ARD, a German TV network ??? find a nation that in large measure has fragmented into fear. Six in 10 Iraqis say their lives are going badly. Only one-third expect things to improve in the next year.[/b]
That represents a dramatic deterioration in just 16 months, a reflection of how the security situation and quality of life in Iraq have unraveled. In an ABC News poll in November 2005, seven in 10 Iraqis said their lives were good and nearly as many predicted things would get better.
Now, said Zaid Hisham, "You worry about everything." The 29-year-old Shiite engineer has postponed plans for his wedding until he can find a job. He and other Baghdad residents were interviewed by USA TODAY to supplement the poll findings. "When I go out, my family calls me every five minutes or whenever there is an explosion ??? there are many ??? to see if I am still alive. It's worry, worry all the time. You can't see your future, and you can't even try to put an outline for your future."
"We are in hell," said Solaf Mohamed Ali, 38, a Shiite woman who works in a bank.
Not every Iraqi makes such dire assessments. There are significant differences in outlook within the country and among its groups.
Kurds, who make up 15%-20% of the population and are largely independent in northern Iraq, describe the fewest problems and express the most optimism about progress in the next year. Shiites, who make up about 60% of the population and suffered discrimination and brutality under Saddam Hussein, say they're struggling, but many remain hopeful about Iraq's long-term future. Sunni Arabs, another 15%-20% of the population and the group that lost power when Saddam was ousted, express almost universal desperation.[/b]
Conditions in Baghdad are worse than elsewhere for Sunnis and Shiites. Of the 429 Baghdad residents surveyed, not one felt safe in his or her own neighborhood. Everyone interviewed in the capital said he or she often avoided even going outside because of violence. [/b]
Beyond Baghdad, the security situation was better, albeit only relatively so. One-third called their neighborhoods safe; two-thirds said they weren't. Outside the capital, 38% said they often avoid leaving home; 42% stay away from markets, and 59% watch what they say.[/b]
Across the country, Iraqis say the basics of day-to-day living have deteriorated. On each of 13 aspects of life ??? from security to the availability of cooking fuel and medical care ??? a majority rated conditions as bad. In not a single case did a majority predict things would get better in the next year.
The poll, taken Feb. 25-March 5, has a margin of error of +/-2.5 percentage points.
The Sunday Times in London published a poll Sunday of 5,019 Iraqis taken by a British firm, Opinion Research Business, from Feb. 10-22. It found that Iraqis by 49%-26% preferred life under the new government to life under Saddam.[/b]
In the USA TODAY/ABC News Poll, Iraqis by 43%-36% said life was better than before the invasion. That's a decline from the optimism in the November 2005 survey, however, when by 51%-29% Iraqis said life was better.[/b]
The survey focused in large part on Iraqis' daily lives.
Most Iraqis say they have altered their daily routines to accommodate the realities of violence:
???More than two-thirds are careful about what they say about themselves to other people.
???Fifty-five percent try to avoid passing by public buildings, often the target of suicide bombers.
???Fifty-four percent stay away from markets and crowded areas.[/b]
Four years of upheaval have taken a toll on Iraqis' mental health. Most report symptoms of post-traumatic stress. Three in four say they have feelings of anger and depression, trouble sleeping and difficulty concentrating on work.
Nadeem Nustafa Ahmed, 31, a Sunni, hides the fact he has a job to avoid being robbed ??? or worse. "I haven't changed my car despite wanting to badly, but people were killed when they started to have new cars and showed they were well paid," he said.
"I can say that my house is like a police station now," said Samer Jaleel, 22, a Sunni student. "The outer wall is 2.5 meters (just over 8 feet) high. We changed the doors into higher and stronger ones. Not only us, but all the houses in the street did the same. Before, we had a very nice street where you could walk and see the gardens. Now it looks like many small jails in one street."
By far, Iraqis rate security concerns as the biggest problem facing their nation and themselves. Four in five say they have encountered violence near their homes:
???Close to half, 44%, say U.S. or coalition forces have been involved in unnecessary violence nearby.
???Four in 10 report kidnappings for ransom in their neighborhoods.
???Three in 10 have had car bombs explode or snipers' crossfire erupt close to home.[/b]
Kurds are relatively sanguine: Two-thirds say they feel "very safe" in their neighborhood. In contrast, fewer than one-third of Shiites and only 3% of Sunnis agree.
"I don't feel safe even at my home," says Munaf Mahmood Lafta, 35, a Sunni taxi driver. "My brother was taken from his house by people wearing Iraqi commando uniforms. That was on Jan. 12, 2006, and we don't know where he is even now. My mother died from her sadness. So where is the safety you speak about? No safety at all and no security ??? not in our neighborhood, nor in my house."
Lafta blames the disappearance of his 22-year-old brother, now presumed dead, on Americans and Shiites. "If you want the truth, now in Iraq every Sunni is hating every Shia, and vice versa," he said.
Hasoon Alak Saheen, 33, no longer feels free to take his donkey cart to sell kerosene in Sunni neighborhoods. "From the way I look, they will know I am Shiite and they will kill me," he said ??? a fate he has seen befall other vendors.
He returned to selling kerosene after enlisting with the Iraqi police in 2005. Although he appreciated the paycheck and the way people treated him, his wife protested that the police job was too dangerous.
To deal with security concerns, 13% of those surveyed have changed jobs and 15% have moved; 18% of those with children have changed their schools.
In all, more than one in six Iraqis say someone in their own household has been physically harmed by violence, and nearly half have a close friend or immediate family member who has been injured.
Even some of those whose sect suffered under Saddam recall that time fondly. "I miss those good old days," said Jasim Mahmood Rajab, 60, a Shiite businessman. "I had my work and my social life, and now ??? nothing. I'm ready to pay everything I have to sit at Abo Nowas Street and eat fish at night ."
Before the war, Abo Nowas Street, which runs along the Tigris River, was lined with outdoor cafes. They are shuttered now.
"I always talk to other girls in the bank remembering our old days when we were going shopping, or even walking in the streets," Solaf Mohamed Ali said. "Now we speak about all those things like a nice dream that is hard to get."
And the next generation?
Shiites are the most optimistic that their children will have a better life than they have had; two-thirds express optimism about that. So do half of the Kurds polled. But seven of 10 Sunnis predict that their children's lives will be worse.
The pessimism was universal among the Sunnis who live in Baghdad: 100% of those surveyed said their children would have a worse life than they have had.
Some Iraqis say they regret having borne children to be brought up amid such hardship.[/b]
Zina Abdulhameed Rajab, a Shiite doctor, is so alarmed by the children she has treated who were injured on their way to school that she is keeping her 2- and 4-year-old sons at home. Her mother has moved in to help babysit.
"Whenever I watch my kids laughing or playing, I can't be so happy from inside my heart because I don't know what the next day will bring," she said. "I really regret the birth of my kids here."
She added: "I wish I could put them back inside me so I would know all the time where they are and how they are doing."
Many Iraqis have curtailed their ambitions for their children, and some yearn to leave their native land. Three in 10 say they would move to a different country if they could. Not quite half of those say they are making plans to go.
"Before the war, my aspirations were to watch my kids growing up, going to the best schools and to have the best education," said Hana' Kareem, 40, a Shiite teacher whose children are 20, 17 and 13.
"My biggest hope now is only one thing: I wish if I had more money so I could offer to move them outside Iraq, so they can have a better life and a better education ??? just like every kid outside Iraq."
Full Report PDF
Poll: Few Bright Spots in Iraqis' Lives
Analysis: Survey Reveals Pessimism, Sectarian Divisions
Posted 18 hr. 2 min. ago
IraqSlogger.com
Iraqis are slipping into pessimism and despair, according to a new poll sponsored by USA Today, ABC News, the BBC, and the German news agency ARD. Close reading of the data shows very few encouraging results, and suggesting a general after four years of war and occupation. The March 5, 2007 poll is an important study for Iraq watchers, as such comprehensive outside-the-Green-Zone information is very difficult to obtain.
Below are some key highlights of the poll's results, along with links to further analysis and the full document.
The Security situation and its effect on Iraqis
A high proportion of Iraqis report that the security situation has caused them to make changes in their lives. A majority of those polled, 51%, said that they ???tried to avoid leaving home,??? a figure that would certainly be much higher if the Kurdish areas were excluded from the tally. (Only five percent of Kurds polled said that they avoided leaving home, although some of these individuals may live outside the Kurdish areas.) 81% of respondents said that they tried to avoid US and Coalition forces, with 95% of Sunnis, 85% of Shi'a, and 40% of Kurds reporting such wariness of Coalition forces.[/b]
On other questions, divisions between Sunni Arabs and Shi'a Arabs are clearly visible, with attitudes toward the current Iraqi government chief among these divisive issues. Only six percent of Sunnis expressed approval of the current Iraqi government, as compared to 68% of Shi'a and 71% of Kurds. While these are clearly on opposite ends of the spectrum, it is noteworthy that the government is not nearly as universally approved among Shi'a Arabs as it is disapproved among Sunni Arabs.[/b]
Infrastructure and economy
Satisfaction with infrastructural and economic issues is trending downward.[/b] The pollsters provide comparative results between the current survey and two others, from 2004 and 2005. 69% report that availability of medical care in their area is ???quite bad??? or ???very bad??? in their areas, up from 47% in 2004. 70% say that availability of clean water in their area is (quite or very) ???bad,??? up from 48% in 2004. The supply of electricity gets especially low marks, with 88% saying electricity is (quite or very) bad in their area, compared to 54% in 2005???s survey.
Although reported overall levels of satisfaction with services are generally low and have dropped since earlier polls, data about expectations for improvement of services are also striking, especially when disaggregated on a sectarian basis.
Pollsters asked respondents to provide their expectations for changes over the next year in different services. On the whole, expectations of improvement are down, as compared to past surveys, by spreads of twenty to forty percentage points.[/b] However, the sectarian discrepancy in expectations from this 2007 respondents bears noting: Across the board, Shi'a Arabs report expectations for improvement in services at much higher levels than Sunni Arabs. On the supply of electricity, 40% of Shi'a Arabs expect the situation to improve over the next year -??? a low figure, but not nearly as low as the five percent of Sunni Arabs who expect such improvement. 56% of Shi'a Arabs expect access to clean water to improve in their area over the next year, compared to only ten percent of Sunni Arabs. Similar discrepancies obtain across the board for availability of jobs (54% to 5%), quality of local schools (58% to 14%), the security situation (62% to 5%), and all other areas in which respondents were asked to provide their expectations over the next year.
While respondents were not asked to specify why they felt that conditions would or would not improve, it would not be exaggeration to say that these results paint a picture of a government in which very few Iraqi Sunnis Arabs place confidence for the improvement of their situation.
Economic data are just as pessimistic, 80% of respondents said that availability of jobs in their area is ???bad,??? as compared to 69% in 2004 and 58% in 2005. [/b]
Indeed, pessimism is a dominant theme in the poll results. 93% of Sunni Arabs said that things in their lives were going quite bad, or very bad, and only four percent expected improvement over the next year. Shi'a Arabs were roughly evenly divided on both questions. Kurds polled much higher, with 68% saying things were going quite good or very good in their lives, with 71% expecting improvement over the next year. These discrepancies are relatively similar when respondents were asked about how things were going for Iraq as a whole, with only five of Sunni Arabs reporting expectations of improvement, as compared to 61% of Shi'a Arabs and 53% of Kurds. [/b]
PTSD
The pollsters, to their credit, also sampled Iraqis for their self-reporting of symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder. While some attention has been given to the effects of PTSD on US troops, little data are available on the effects of stress on Iraqi civilians. The results are disturbing: 71% of Iraqis report three or four symptoms associated with PTSD. While this is not the equivalent of a clinical diagnosis, it is a window into the psychological strains of the last four years, at least, on Iraqi society.
Foreign powers
The poll also asked Iraqis about the role of foreign powers in Iraq. Only 12 percent overall rated the US role in Iraq as positive. This figure is even more striking when broken down by community: Only one percent of Sunni Arabs and six percent of Shi'a Arabs said the US was playing a positive role, as compared to 53% of Kurds. Similar numbers obtain for the British role in the country. [/b]
Attitudes toward Iran are also noteworthy. Less than one-half of one percent of Sunni Arabs believed that Iran was playing a positive role in the country, with 98% saying Iran plays a negative role. Interestingly, only 33% of Shi'a assigned Iran a positive role, with 40% saying Iran???s role is negative. Nearly half of Iraqi Shi'a (47%) said that Iran was ???actively engaged in encouraging sectarian violence??? in Iraq. This should complicate some Iraq pundits??? version of reality, in which Iran and the Iraqi Shi'a march in lock-step.
These numbers are almost reversed for Saudi Arabia, with 91% of Shi'a ascribing the kingdom a negative role, and 39% of Sunni Arabs saying the Saudi role is positive. Only nine percent of Sunnis reported a negative role for the Saudis. 92% of Shi'a expressed the view that Saudi Arabia encouraged sectarian violence in the country.
Most un-spinnable for the US will be respondents??? feelings about attacks on Coalition forces. 51% of respondents reported that such attacks were acceptable, up from only 17% in 2004. These data include 35% of Shi'a Arabs who said such resistance was acceptable, and a striking 94% of Sunni Arabs. Only seven percent of Kurds regarded such attacks as acceptable. [/b]
As for attacks on Iraqi government forces, 34% of Sunni Arabs said this was acceptable, compared with only one percent of both Shi'a and Kurds. 44% of respondents reported that US or Coalition forces had committed unnecessary violence against Iraqi citizens near their area, including 60% of Sunnis and 46% of Shi'a. [/b]
Sectarian separation and federalism
There were very few bright spots in the poll results. One result is important to note: Iraqis overwhelmingly reject the physical separation of their people along sectarian lines. 99% of Sunni Arabs, 95% of Shi'a Arabs, and 78% of Kurds said such separation was a ???bad thing??? for Iraq.
Political separation was more controversial, however, with 97% of Sunnis favoring a united, centralized Iraq , compared with only 41% of Shi'a Arabs (Not a majority, but still a higher figure than some might expect), and only 20% of Kurds. 40% of Shi'a favored a united, but federal system, compared to only two percent of Sunni Arabs.
Religious attendance
Another piece of the data deserves to be noted more than it has been: Over half of those polled reported attending mosque less than once a year or not at all. 49% said they ???never??? attend, and another four percent said they attended ???once a year or less.???
Attendance of religious services is usually a good indicator of the degree of secularism or religiosity among a population. This is a higher degree of secularism among Iraqis than much of the Iraq-focused punditry might allow for.
Links
The full document is available for download here: (Iraq_poll_March2007.pdf).
Agencies conducting the poll have offered their own analyses of the results. These, along with the full document, are well worth a read, as they provide scarce information about conditions inside today's Iraq.
The BBC has posted its write-up of the results, and USA Today ran a story Monday with its analysis. ABC News has linked a great deal of material from the polling-centered section of its website, including its analysis, statements from survey workers, photographs of the poll workers, and a discussion of the survey's methodology.
They don't need to, they have the U.S. to do it for them.
According to what I've been reading it seems like Prime Minister Maliki cut a deal with the U.S. over the "surge" in Baghdad. Maliki would convince Sadr to have his militia refrain from attacks and in return the U.S. would go after the Sunnis.
Thanks dude.