Monday, December 27, 2004
Poll: U.S. Troops Support the War in Iraq
No surprise to me.
The results:
I can see the New York Times writeup already:
"In a recent Gannett poll of US troops, nearly a third of combat veterans do not believe the war in Iraq is worth fighting. The poll raises new questions about the morale of troops in Iraq, one of whom recently grilled Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on the Bush Administration's failure to provide vehicles with adequate armor protection."
F***ing morons.
And the New York Times writeup: "A quarter of US troops say they plan to leave the service, raising the specter of draft."
Again, the New York Times: Other poll findings suggest that the Bush Adminstration, whose embattled Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has come under fire for using an autopen to sign letters of condolence to families of US troops killed in the "war" on terror, has failed to make progress in selling support for the war to the troops. The poll also found that job satisfaction rates in the military have remained stagnant for the past year.
More actual poll findings:
Ok, asshats. What shortage???? SHOW ME the U.S. unit currently in Iraq that doesn't have the modern kevlar vests for its troops. I'm calling your miserable, stupid, ignorant bluff!
I will donate 100 dollars to the charity of your choice if you can show me a U.S. unit in Iraq right now that cannot equip its soldiers with kevlar vests and plates.
This will be surprising to the media. And SHOULD get a lot more play than it will. But the fact is that the troops on the ground know that there is nothing in Pentagon policy coming down authorizing them to do what was done to the detainees in Abu Ghraib.
Thes idiots can dig and dig and dig, and grasp at straw after miserable straw. But George W. Bush had personally made it clear he does not condone torture.
(The link to an article in which George W. Bush clearly and publicly ruled out the use of torture, originally in this post, has apparently expired, unfortunately.)
Essentially, the troops know damn well that the six idiots in Abu Ghraib were acting on their own volition. No, they weren't carrying out secret guidance from Rumsfeld - Andrew Sullivan's recurring wet dream notwithstanding.
Splash, out
Jason
The results:
Sixty-three percent of respondents approve of the way President Bush is handling the war, and 60% remain convinced it is a war worth fighting. Support for the war is even greater among those who have served longest in the combat zone: Two-thirds of combat vets say the war is worth fighting.
I can see the New York Times writeup already:
"In a recent Gannett poll of US troops, nearly a third of combat veterans do not believe the war in Iraq is worth fighting. The poll raises new questions about the morale of troops in Iraq, one of whom recently grilled Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld on the Bush Administration's failure to provide vehicles with adequate armor protection."
F***ing morons.
In addition, 87%% say they're satisfied with their jobs and, if given the choice today, only 25% say they'd leave the service.
And the New York Times writeup: "A quarter of US troops say they plan to leave the service, raising the specter of draft."
Compared with last year, the percentages for support for the war and job satisfaction remain essentially unchanged.
Again, the New York Times: Other poll findings suggest that the Bush Adminstration, whose embattled Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has come under fire for using an autopen to sign letters of condolence to families of US troops killed in the "war" on terror, has failed to make progress in selling support for the war to the troops. The poll also found that job satisfaction rates in the military have remained stagnant for the past year.
More actual poll findings:
•60% blame Congress for the shortage of body armor in the combat zone.
Ok, asshats. What shortage???? SHOW ME the U.S. unit currently in Iraq that doesn't have the modern kevlar vests for its troops. I'm calling your miserable, stupid, ignorant bluff!
I will donate 100 dollars to the charity of your choice if you can show me a U.S. unit in Iraq right now that cannot equip its soldiers with kevlar vests and plates.
•12% say civilian Pentagon policymakers should be held accountable for abuse at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.
This will be surprising to the media. And SHOULD get a lot more play than it will. But the fact is that the troops on the ground know that there is nothing in Pentagon policy coming down authorizing them to do what was done to the detainees in Abu Ghraib.
Thes idiots can dig and dig and dig, and grasp at straw after miserable straw. But George W. Bush had personally made it clear he does not condone torture.
(The link to an article in which George W. Bush clearly and publicly ruled out the use of torture, originally in this post, has apparently expired, unfortunately.)
Essentially, the troops know damn well that the six idiots in Abu Ghraib were acting on their own volition. No, they weren't carrying out secret guidance from Rumsfeld - Andrew Sullivan's recurring wet dream notwithstanding.
Splash, out
Jason
Comments:
So Jason, if the 6 soldiers acted on their own accord, how do you explain the similarities between the style and nature of the prisoner interrogations at Gitmo, Afghanistan, and in Iraq? How do you explain the fact that prisoners at all three locations were being subjected to the same style, nature, and techniques?
We now know that in all three locations the CIA and off-the-books special operations personnel were coming in and out conducting interrogations. And those interrogations included taking pictures of the prisoners in very revealing ways in the attempts to then use those pictures against the prisoners.
So, based on the fact that what happened in Iraq fits the model of how all interrogations were being handled, how do you explain the statement that they were acting alone?
There are always 3 sides to every story...and I think we will never know the truth, but it plays to the logical conclusion that if it is happening everyone else to some degree that there is a central role that the DoD is playing.
Do I think the president wrote the order? No. Plausible Deniablity and all that. Do I think Rummy did...yep. And there is enough talk behind the curtain to bring doubt to the Administrations statements that they had nothing to do with it.
And Jason, you seriously must know that just because a politician says something in a speech doesn't make it the truth right?
Opinion, Truth, then Fact. Enough people have an opinion...it becomes truth. That truth goes unchallenged long enough...it becomes fact. Such is life.
CL
We now know that in all three locations the CIA and off-the-books special operations personnel were coming in and out conducting interrogations. And those interrogations included taking pictures of the prisoners in very revealing ways in the attempts to then use those pictures against the prisoners.
So, based on the fact that what happened in Iraq fits the model of how all interrogations were being handled, how do you explain the statement that they were acting alone?
There are always 3 sides to every story...and I think we will never know the truth, but it plays to the logical conclusion that if it is happening everyone else to some degree that there is a central role that the DoD is playing.
Do I think the president wrote the order? No. Plausible Deniablity and all that. Do I think Rummy did...yep. And there is enough talk behind the curtain to bring doubt to the Administrations statements that they had nothing to do with it.
And Jason, you seriously must know that just because a politician says something in a speech doesn't make it the truth right?
Opinion, Truth, then Fact. Enough people have an opinion...it becomes truth. That truth goes unchallenged long enough...it becomes fact. Such is life.
CL
# posted by 
: 10:30 AM
: 10:30 AM
"And Jason, you seriously must know that just because a politician says something in a speech doesn't make it the truth right?
Opinion, Truth, then Fact. Enough people have an opinion...it becomes truth. That truth goes unchallenged long enough...it becomes fact. Such is life."
________________________________
Politicians like Kerry and Kennedy? (Maybe Michael Moore?)
If enough people have the wrong opinion it doesn't become truth: Apparently a lot of people thought Osama bin Laden wasn't a problem; is that true?
If truth goes on unchallenged long enough it becomes fact? The truth is true; but lies that go unchallenged become perceived as fact. Perception is not fact. There may be "three" perceptions of a thing and truth encompasses them all, even the wrong ones. Truth is the entire information about a thing, including misperceptions.
Abu Graib? The military is taking care of the problem. Get over it. I am.
G.M.
Post a Comment
Opinion, Truth, then Fact. Enough people have an opinion...it becomes truth. That truth goes unchallenged long enough...it becomes fact. Such is life."
________________________________
Politicians like Kerry and Kennedy? (Maybe Michael Moore?)
If enough people have the wrong opinion it doesn't become truth: Apparently a lot of people thought Osama bin Laden wasn't a problem; is that true?
If truth goes on unchallenged long enough it becomes fact? The truth is true; but lies that go unchallenged become perceived as fact. Perception is not fact. There may be "three" perceptions of a thing and truth encompasses them all, even the wrong ones. Truth is the entire information about a thing, including misperceptions.
Abu Graib? The military is taking care of the problem. Get over it. I am.
G.M.
# posted by : 6:43 PM
: 6:43 PM
