What Iraqis Really Think

[aimeecc]

The information in Iraq Index, although predominantly from the U.S. government, also gathers information from other sources. And the Brookings Institute clearly identifies where its sources are from.
http://www.brookings.edu/saban/~/med...ex20071221.pdf

NOTE ON THE METHODOLOGY OF THE IRAQ INDEX:
Although the footnotes to the Iraq Index document our sources in detail, it is worth noting here a few broad points.
The majority of our information comes from the U.S. Government, though we must often analyze it and process it
further to show trends over the full period since Saddam Hussein fell in 2003. Some information comes from
foreign journalists on the ground and from nongovernmental organizations; a very modest amount to date comes
from Iraqi sources. Most tables and charts are straightforward representations of data as we obtain it from the
above primary sources, with only modest further analysis and processing required. However, a few graphics, such
as those on crime and unemployment rates, require more methodological work (and more assumptions) on our
part—and are as a result also perhaps somewhat less precise than most of the tables and charts.

They're most recent polling is from September 2007, from liberal media.

POLLING/POLITICS
IRAQ: WHERE THINGS STAND 2007104
UPDATED SEPTEMBER 2007
Last of 4 Surveys Conducted by D3 Systems for the BBC, ABC News, ARD German TV and USA Today
(2,112 Iraqi adults from throughout the country were interviewed)

Its been released monthly since November 2003, so you can pour through back issues and see that when it was really bad, the Iraq Index was true and gave the straight facts (many killed on both sides, services lacking, negative polls). Even the most recent polls can't be quantified as "good", and sends a mixed message, as seems all polls in Iraq. But it does show that killings and deaths (on both sides) are down, and services are increasing each month.

[aimeecc]

She/he may not be... but then why care if Americans can or cannot legally travel to an extremely short list of nations the US has had occasional hostilities with?

[classicman]

Originally Posted by aimeecc

She/he may not be... but then why care if Americans can or cannot legally travel to an extremely short list of nations the US has had occasional hostilities with?

Cuz she/he is probably from one of those little bothersome places that need to trash Amereica to make them feel good about their own country. We're America and they NEED us not to be good. Its the only chance their insignificance has any chance at being relevant.

Originally Posted by aimeecc

why care if Americans can or cannot legally travel to an extremely short list of nations the US has had occasional hostilities with?

Because it demonstrates an anti-democratic principle.

If you, as an American, call your country "the leader of the democratic world" or "leader of the free world" or "introducing democracy to Irak or to wherever ..." then I think you ought to know some of the reasons why you have been misinformed. The fact that I am not an American should definitely upset you. But for the reason that you have a better chance of hearing the facts about your own country from a "foreigner", which brings us to another reason why you've been misinformed about democratic principles - your censorship of the national media.

The truth is that there are a number of countries that practice far better democratic principles than the U.S. Do you disbelieve that?

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aretha's doctor

If you, as an American, call your country "the leader of the democratic world" or "leader of the free world" or "introducing democracy to Irak or to wherever ..." then I think you ought to know some of the reasons why you have been misinformed.

Well I certainly have never called our country those things. And the ones who usually are calling us those things are usually idiots from other countries who have some bone to pick with our international policies. Frankly, I could give a rats ass.

This may be the only time that I agree with you Merc - well, partly anyway.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Aretha's doctor

This may be the only time that I agree with you Merc - well, partly anyway.

The point is that most of this international back lash is all about Iraq. Well we are stuck with that tar baby and we cannot just leave. And to all of those who think we can I would say let them stand up and be counted, including those who are currently in power or may soon hold the keys to the White House. And when the smoke clears and there is a massive genocide and relocation of people in Iraq you will hold the responsibility for the event, not me. Certainly do not ask me or my family to go back there and fix it after that.

I really believe that if the US is viewed in such a bad way by so many people it is time for us to withdraw a bit from the international scene, esp with our aid programs, and let the chips fall where they will...

[Griff]

Originally Posted by Aretha's doctor

The truth is that there are a number of countries that practice far better democratic principles than the U.S. Do you disbelieve that?

[richlevy]

Griff you responded to the argument by implying that there are countries which are far worse than the U.S. I don't think anyone here disagrees with this.

As for democratic principles, this census shows that in recent presidential, not off-year elections, of potential voters only 70-72 percent are registered and 58-64 percent vote.

Even in some countries where compulsory voting is not or is no longer practiced, they manage better turnouts.

IDEA places the US 139 out of 172. I am still trying to figure out if countries which exclude women from voting are penalized or rewarded in the counting, but in any case based on voter turnout alone, the US is not the most democratic country in the world.

Is voter turnout the sole criteria? No, but turnout can be an indicator of apathy, which can be either a cause of, or effect from, the failure of governments to truly represent the majority of citizens above special interests.

Are we the worst? No. In general, in terms of safety, wealth, and freedom, the US is better than most countries in the world. We are also not the world's most populous. A child be born in the world today has (I'm guessing) about a 1 in 20 chance of being born a U.S. citizen. The child would be 4 times more likely to be born Chinese, 3 times more likely to be born Indian, and 2/3 to 1/2 as likely to be born in Indonesia, Brazil, Pakistan, or Bangladesh.

If I were given a choice from that list, knowing what I know now (to quote a famous politician), I would still choose to be born here.

Right now the system is a bit f***d up. However, our founding fathers gave us a self-correcting and non-violent system to effect change if we choose to use it. Personally, I think we will simply because deep down we all know things can't go on this way much longer.

[Griff]

Those are all French instances of anti-democratic and / or poor international acting. Through several threads we've seen commentary from A D about our poor record which I readily admit and questions about our stability which I also have. Assuming he's French, I just want to be sure he isn't holding France up as a model for stable democracies.

[aimeecc]

I've been to Iraq, and my opinion is... There's no easy solution.
If we pull out, the predictable out come is no more Americans killed (in Iraq at least). But what about Iraq? Will it descend further into civil war? I'd bet yes. Can Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki unify Iraq? Um, no.
Fast forward a few more years... more dead on both sides. Slightly improved security. More Iraqi forces trained and equipped... When the US pulls out, will it descend into civil war? I think so. The Iraqi forces will break down by sect, and sectarian violence will return. Hatred doesn't go away just because more security forces are trained. Will whomever the new PM is be able to unify Iraq? Probably not, because he probably got elected by whatever sect he's from. Probably Shi'a, unless they boycott the elections for some reason or another. The Sunnis will be pissed (again, still, always) and they'll start killing the Shia's who in turn will kill Sunnis... sound familiar?

When I was there, the Iraqi Minister of Interior would not talk to the Iraqi Minister of Defense. The US wanted to have the two coordinate on training and equipping (so the Iraqi police and the Iraqi army would have interoperable equipment), but they refused to even meet. How can reconstruction be done if the top leadership refuses to talk to each other?

Over simplified? Yeah, probably. But the hatred Iraqis show for one another doesn't disappear overnight. Or in 2 years. Or in 10. It doesn't matter how many we train or how stable we make it... once we leave, the hatred will surface and the killings will begin again.

Prior to the UN, most nations just exterminated or drove away whatever minority rebelled the most. Then the other minorities were too scared to rebel. Its harsh, but thats how it worked. Another common method was to kill the men or enslave them and send then to far reaches of the kingdom. Women were married to the soldiers, and the minority 'bred' out. So, the historic traditional solutions aren't going to work in Iraq today.

Iraq has to come to its own solution. Vietnam did. We may not like that they are Communist, but its stable there. Ok, so the quality of life isn't that great either. And they have restrictions on travel for their people (far greater than any restrictions the US has ever put on their citizens, may I point out?). And they don't have fredom of expression. Or too many other freedoms. But its stable at least.

[aimeecc]

Glatt, if you see my previous post, Cuba is purely political, not for any other reason... and I don't agree with it. But I actually don't particularly care that much because I have no desire to go to Cuba, although I've heard its nice. Just not on my list of places to go.
So, again... if you want to go to Cuba...what are you doing to change the laws? Do you write letters to your Congressman? Do you lobby Congress? How about running for office?

[regular.joe]

The Cuban Assets Control Regulations, 31 CFR
Part 515 (the “Regulations”) were issued by the U.S. Government on 8
July 1963 under the Trading With the Enemy Act in response to certain
hostile actions by the Cuban government. They are still in force today and
affect all U.S. citizens and permanent residents wherever they are
located, all people and organizations physically in the United States, and
all branches and subsidiaries of U.S. organizations throughout the world.
The Regulations are administered by the U.S. Treasury Department's
Office of Foreign Assets Control. The basic goal of the sanctions is to
isolate the Cuban government economically and deprive it of U.S. dollars.
Criminal penalties for violating the sanctions range up to 10 years in
prison, $1,000,000 in corporate fines, and $250,000 in individual fines.
Civil penalties up to $55,000 per violation may also be imposed. Please
note that the Regulations require those dealing with Cuba to maintain
records and, upon request from the U.S. Treasury Department, to
furnish information regarding such dealings.

Glatt, get elected. Make some changes. Lobby your elected officials, get involved. No one in the U.S. will threaten your life or liberty for speaking up. Well, no one on the payroll of the U.S. Treasury.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by regular.joe

Glatt, get elected. Make some changes. Lobby your elected officials, get involved.

I said it would be cool to visit, not that I was willing to work my ass off, fighting the system so I can go. There are lots of places I think it would be cool to visit. I'll go to those others first, as it is less effort.

It just pisses me off that my government won't let me go. That's what the East German government did to its citizens. We are not free if our own government restricts our travel. It's the principle of the thing.

[regular.joe]

Glatt, our laws are malleable. Get off of your ass, quit complaining, hell continue complaining....just get off of your ass and change it.