Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Newsvine
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiUS Surge Has Failed - Iraqi Poll
About 70% of Iraqis believe security has deteriorated in the area covered by the US military "surge" of the past six months, an opinion poll suggests.
The survey by the BBC, ABC News and NHK of more than 2,000 people across Iraq also suggests that nearly 60% see attacks on US-led forces as justified.
This rises to 93% among Sunni Muslims compared to 50% for Shia.
The findings come as the top US commander in Iraq, Gen David Petraeus, prepares to address Congress.
He and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker are due to testify about the effects of the surge and the current situation in Iraq.
The poll suggests that the overall mood in Iraq is as negative as it has been since the US-led invasion in 2003, says BBC world affairs correspondent Nick Childs.
The poll was conducted in more than 450 neighbourhoods across all 18 provinces of Iraq in August, and has a margin of error of + or - 2.5%.
It was commissioned jointly by the BBC, ABC and Japan's NHK.
Divided nation
It is the fourth such poll in which BBC News has been involved, with previous ones conducted in February 2004, November 2005 and February 2007.
It was commissioned with the specific purpose of assessing the effects of the surge as well as tracking longer term trends in Iraq.
Between 67% and 70% of the Iraqis polled believe the surge has hampered conditions for political dialogue, reconstruction and economic development, according to the August 2007 findings.
Only 29% think things will get better in the next year, compared to 64% two years ago.
The number of people wanting coalition forces to leave immediately rose since February's poll but more than half - 53% - still said they should stay until security improved.
The survey reveals two great divides, our correspondent notes.
First, there is the one between relative optimism registered in November 2005 and the gloom of this year's two polls.
In between, there was the deadly bombing of the Shia mosque in Samarra, which unleashed a bitter and deadly sectarianism.
The other great divide is the one now revealed between the Sunni and Shia communities.
While 88% of Sunnis say things are going badly in their lives, 54% of Shia think they are going well.
'Good for Baghdad'
Dr Toby Dodge, who was involved in running the poll, pointed to the fact that so many Iraqis saw no improvement to their safety since the US deployed an extra 30,000 troops this year, bringing their number up to nearly 170,000.
"I think that's a damning critique and an indication of the pessimism and the violence on the ground," he told the BBC's Radio Five Live.
Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri Maliki insisted on Monday that the surge had had a positive effect in the capital, Baghdad, at least.
Violence had dropped 75%, he told the Iraqi parliament, without giving figures.
At the same time, he warned that Iraqi forces were not ready to take over security from the US military which had, he said, "helped... in a great way in fighting terrorism".
For more graphs on the poll see http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6983027.stm
© 2007 BBC News
13 Comments so far
Show AllWe ALL knew exactly what the general was going to say. He read a prepared statement written by a White House speech writer. His body language gave away the fact that he knew it was all lies. Congress will give Bush the money and approve more of the same and nothng will change. Hallibrton will have half of the money, big oil will take the oil and that is what the entire deal is all about.
I listened to as much of the propaganda listing the success of the surge as I could stand.
It occurs to me that rape works better for the rapists if it is a gang rape. As long as no one cares enough to punish them.
It shows how ignorant the americans are when they installed a Shia government in Irak. I guess they forgot that the Shia are in power in Iran. Maybe they never knew this. Americans can't even name their own 50 states, let alone knowing anything about another country. Most of the americans who wanted to bomb Irak couldn't even locate it on a map of the world. Americans probably think all Muslims are the same. They have no understanding of the tribal nature of the Middle East and the divisiona within Islam. Once again the Ugly American rears its ugly head where he doesn't belong....and things get ugly. Americans will strengthen Iranian control over Irak, either by design or by stupidity. Hard to say which. Maybe it was all planned this way to give the US a casus belli to attack Iran. Given the world is on the brink of a massive drpression, maybe they want another world war. They've done it before.
IRAQI'S CHEER AS BRITISH TROOPS DEPART.WHAT'S WITH BUSH AND CHENEY BLOODSHED SPIN IF AMERICANS DEPART? IMPEACH BUSH AND CHENEY BEFORE THEY LOCK UP ALL THE OIL DEALS FOR THEMSELVES AND HALLIBURTON. NANCY, GET UP OFF YOUR ASS AND ACT LIKE A REPUBLICAN. AMERICA FIRST!
Okay, so you believed Saddam had weapons (when it was a known fact they were destroyed in the 1990s). So what? Did he ever threaten to attack the world's superpower? No he didn't.
The U.S. administration keeps whining that Iran is "meddling" in Iraq. What on earth does it think IT'S doing? The U.S. had no business attacking and occuping Iraq in the first place. As a consequence, they should just leave and try to pay reparations to Iraq. In other words, act in an honorable manner. But I guess that's too much to ask greedy imperialist war criminals to do.
Not as much of a headache as you are giving to the Iraqis. I promise that.
That is what is happening in the USA. Yes? Mexicans is giving Americans a headache as it were?
I believe this poll is more than likely accurate - and here is why. Both the Shia dominated Iraq "Government," and Iran, want to have positive relations with one another. This may be difficult for some Americans to believe and understand at first as unlike USA, both Iraqis and Iranians learn from History and remember it longer than the typical American does. When one takes into consideration that both present-day Iran and Iraq share a History that span quite literally Millennia, as well as the fact that both nations were double-crossed by the USA several times and reasons, albeit different reasons depending on whether one talks about Iran or Iraq -adds up to the the fact that both nations simply do not trust the USA. Understandably, neither do some Americans themselves. Why does the USA trust al-Maliki? Al-Maliki both/and either/or seems to be talking out of both sides of his mouth perhaps while forming a lasting truce with Iran to kick out the USA occupiers. Iraq has every reason to trust Iran but no reason to trust the USA. Iran is more reliable than the USA is and I wager that Iran and Iraq will not be enemies to one another again for several years at least. Iraq is a Shiite country now and Iran does seem willing to help rebuild Iraq. While this is bad news for the USA interests - for Iran and Iraq, peace between these two nations were a very long time coming.
To help cheer up Americans in realizing their inevitable defeat in this fiasco of their choosing:
In March 2003, did I believe your Government when they said that Saddam Hussein had WMD? Yes I did! Only because Saddam Hussein has had them before (He particularly liked using Sarin and Mustard gases and I would not have been surprised if he also had VX at one time or another during his reign) as these WMD the USA gave him to use on Iran as a USA response to their noble Revolution. However, the parts of the now total fabrication of justification that I have never believe for one second was that a USA invasion of Iraq would be easy and that the Iraqis would greet Americans with flowers as the USA already bombed their very ancient land for about ten continuous years prior to the official invasion/occupation.
I am so upset that the USA invaded Iraq under false pretenses and paranoia while daring to use a very traumatized people as a scapegoat for comparably minor problems the USA has. These reasons make the USA even lower than the Nazis when comparing the two. Why one may ask? For one thing, the Nazis did not start WW2 feeling paranoia. On the contrary, the Nazis had REAL, not fabricated, scores to settle with very specific enemies that in their mind certainly, albeit extreme, had to be dealt with. The Iraqis did not ask for the USA to use them as guinea pigs and as scapegoats because Iraqis have never hurt the USA and therefore did not deserve such a bestowal. Conversely, has France and the European Jews hurt Germany once upon a time, prior to the start of WW2? More, and for a longer time, than Americans could ever fathom. Certainly much more than what Mexico is doing to the USA right now.
Look, folks, nobody is getting out of Iraq until that oil bill is signed by the Iraqi parliament. Got that?
The oil bill is all that's left of BushCo's plan for "Free Trade Zone Iraq." If he pulls out without that bill, he's got absolutely NO legacy.
You're in Iraq. Get used to it.
As I write General Betray us is testifying. Nothing has changed, there is no new strategy, it's all hype and lies. I've lost count as to how many times he has referred to Iran (and Syria) fueling the insurgency and undermining the US troops.
Bush and company are desperate criminals and they know they are losing. Bombing Iran will likely be their Swan song.
I couldn't stand to hear General Betrayus's Infomercial for very long. He seemed to be just vomiting the NeoCon party line.
As near as I can tell the real purpose of the 'surge' was to continue plundering our treasury. If so, then it is a success.
Really?
General Petraeus's report was peachy keen! I wonder who's telling the truth.
In a fantasically crafted piece of Republican propoganda, General Petraeus managed to show how the 'Surge' is working, incriminate Iran, and sway opinion to pro-war methodology.
It's all BS. The first words out of his mouth proved his lie. He said "This is MY report. Nobody in my chain of command had anything to do with it." (words to that effect)
Only an idiot would believe that bush would let a general come out on LIVE television with a report the entire world is going to listen to without even reviewing it first. The bush administration knew exactly what he was going to say. The reason he said it's HIS report is so that when the lie is revealed you can't trace it back any further.
I believe that the BBC/ABC News poll is more than likely correct.
john dean was on the diane rehm show this morning, and his analysis says the executive branch is already too powerful and congress can no longer stop it. given that my senator, carl levin, has been saying the same thing for years, and that my two senators and congressperson all voted against authorizing military action, i'd say dean was about right. everybody who is trying to whip congress into stopping bush's war is wasting their breath.
what this nation needs is something much more profound than an election--something closer to a constitutional reconvention. i suggest that if a majority of the citizens of this country voted in referendum to end the war, the president be bound to withdraw the troops.