Iraqi Public Wants Timetable for US Withdrawal, But Thinks US Plans Permanent Bases in Iraq

[one...two...tree 2,762]

A new poll of the Iraqi public finds that a large majority of Iraqis think the US plans to maintain bases in Iraq permanently, even if the newly elected government asks the US to leave. A large majority favors setting a timeline for the withdrawal of US forces, though this majority divides over whether the timeline should be over a period of six months or two years. Nearly half of Iraqis approve of attacks on US-led forces—including nine out of 10 Sunnis. Most Iraqis believe that many aspects of their lives will improve once the US-led forces leave, but are nonetheless uncertain that Iraqi security forces are ready to stand on their own.

Sources of Urgency for Withdrawal

The major source of urgency for withdrawal is the feeling, especially among Sunnis, that it is offensive for their country to be occupied. A secondary reason is that US forces attract more attacks and make the violence worse.

Effects of US Withdrawal

Iraqis believe that many aspects of their lives would improve were US-led forces to leave Iraq. Sunnis and Shia feel this way regarding every aspect asked about, while the Kurds have more mixed views. However, the majority is still not sure that Iraqi security forces are ready for US-led forces to leave within a short-term time frame.

Interestingly, there is a fair amount of consensus that if US-led troops were to withdraw, there would be substantial improvement in the performance of the Iraqi state. Overall, 73% think there will be an increase in the willingness of factions to cooperate in Parliament, including majorities of Kurds (62%), Sunnis (87%) and Shia (68%). Sixty-seven percent assume there will be an increase in the availability of public services such as electricity, schools and sanitation (Sunni 83%, Shia 63%, Kurds 54%). Sixty-four percent assume crime will go down (Sunnis 88%, Shia 66%), but here again the Kurds diverge, with 77% assuming crime will increase.

http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/art...65&lb=hmpg2

[Mirorgate 0]

Hell I'm all about have not gone in the first time... but immediate?... am afraid there would be civil war as the 3 main factions (as listed in polls) would all vie to take control of the government. And I doubt even if UN took a base to ensure peaceful elections.. they'd be put upon too because they're "feriners on our land".

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Hell I'm all about have not gone in the first time... but immediate?... am afraid there would be civil war as the 3 main factions (as listed in polls) would all vie to take control of the government. And I doubt even if UN took a base to ensure peaceful elections.. they'd be put upon too because they're "feriners on our land".

An immediate withdrawal is what they are divided on, but they are unanimous in wanting a timetable that is somewhere between 6 mos. to 2 years - a complete withdrawal. Meanwhile Bush keeps insisting he will not give a timetable - not only that, it is obvious that the White House plans on having a permanent military presence there.

[Ban Hammer 13,673]

Hell I'm all about have not gone in the first time... but immediate?... am afraid there would be civil war as the 3 main factions (as listed in polls) would all vie to take control of the government. And I doubt even if UN took a base to ensure peaceful elections.. they'd be put upon too because they're "feriners on our land".

An immediate withdrawal is what they are divided on, but they are unanimous in wanting a timetable that is somewhere between 6 mos. to 2 years - a complete withdrawal. Meanwhile Bush keeps insisting he will not give a timetable - not only that, it is obvious that the White House plans on having a permanent military presence there.

fine with me, let's get the hades outta dodge and let them deal with the nutcases over there.

edited to add: i'm all for an immediate get outta dodge deal

Edited September 4, 2006 by charlesandnessa

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

An immediate withdrawal is what they are divided on, but they are unanimous in wanting a timetable that is somewhere between 6 mos. to 2 years - a complete withdrawal. Meanwhile Bush keeps insisting he will not give a timetable - not only that, it is obvious that the White House plans on having a permanent military presence there.

It'll be upwards of 2 years as Bush is going to be President for another 2+ and he sure as hell ain't getting anyone out of there. Stubborn sob. Maybe Congress gets the balls to cut back the funding making a withdrawl unavoidable. Odds of that are rather low, too. I'm afraid the folks in Iraq are going to have to live with US military occupying their country a while longer...

[dalegg 143]

fine with me, let's get the hades outta dodge and let them deal with the nutcases over there.

edited to add: i'm all for an immediate get outta dodge deal

Cut 'n run?!

[I'm Gone 60]

We are going to leave Iraq about as fast as we have left Germany, Korea and Bosnia.

Chris Hughes

The Mirror (UK)

January 3, 2006

AMERICA is to spend £1billion ($1.77 billion US dollars) on an embassy in Baghdad "more secure than the Pentagon".

The embassy will be guarded by 15ft blast walls and ground-to-air missiles and the main building will have bunkers for use during air offensives.

The grounds will include as many as 300 houses for consular and military officials.

And a large-scale barracks will be built for Marines who will protect what will be Washington's biggest and most secure overseas building.

The US also wants to build four massive military superbases around Iraq's capital.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

We are going to leave Iraq about as fast as we have left Germany, Korea and Bosnia.

Chris Hughes

The Mirror (UK)

January 3, 2006

AMERICA is to spend £1billion ($1.77 billion US dollars) on an embassy in Baghdad "more secure than the Pentagon".

The embassy will be guarded by 15ft blast walls and ground-to-air missiles and the main building will have bunkers for use during air offensives.

The grounds will include as many as 300 houses for consular and military officials.

And a large-scale barracks will be built for Marines who will protect what will be Washington's biggest and most secure overseas building.

The US also wants to build four massive military superbases around Iraq's capital.

May we at least hope that somebody sane will intervene at some point before 2050?

[gimygirl 0]

[Ban Hammer 13,673]

fine with me, let's get the hades outta dodge and let them deal with the nutcases over there.

edited to add: i'm all for an immediate get outta dodge deal

Cut 'n run?!

i think we accomplished the mission a long time ago. might as well leave and make everyone happy. wonder what vj would complain about if that came about (us leaving iraq)?

[I'm Gone 60]

May we at least hope that somebody sane will intervene at some point before 2050?

Well by 2050 I'll probably be in that group or sitting there taking a dump in my Depends not caring. LOL

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bump. Bush, are you listening?

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Bump. Bush, are you listening?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Bump. Bush, are you listening?

When I say Bush...I mean every last die hard fan of this miserable failure of a President.

[Ban Hammer 13,673]

Bump. Bush, are you listening?

When I say Bush...I mean every last die hard fan of this miserable failure of a President.

oh and i thought you were meaning this