Poll: Iraq's future and Bush's legacy

[imenja]

Imagine a hypothetical situation. You have only two choices.

1) Democracy is established in Iraq and American troops are able to withdraw within twelve months without Iraq turning into chaos. Such an outcome would boost Bush's political popularity and enhance his legacy as a president.

2) Your (and my own) predictions that the elections are a farce are realized. The US remains bogged down in a quagmire for at least the duration of the Bush administration, and no lasting democracy or even security is established for Iraqis.

This is not a poll of what you think will happen. Most of us seem to believe the second is far more likely. Rather, the poll asks which outcome you would prefer. I realize this is a somewhat artificial polemic, but I'm interested in seeing how DU members respond.

[Lone_Wolf_Moderate]

1. If actually having a stable and free Iraq means Bush has to look good,

than so be it. For those who voted for option 2: Do you hate Bush so much, that you would actually WANT Iraq to fail?

[Skittles]

38. no

we are voting on what we think will happen

[imenja]

40. then you haven't read the directions

[Osamasux]

2. Pointless poll.

I know what my morals are. I know the leaders I would choose have similarly high morals. I know the current administration and the congressional majority are morally bankrupt.

If we are dealing in the hypothetical and I have to choose, I will select:
3) The US lets the weapons inspectors finish their work. No weapons are found. The administration does not invent false evidence or lie to build support for their predetermined course. Iraq is not invaded. 1,500 US soldiers and 100,000 Iraqis are not killed. Kerry is elected. Osama bin Laden is captured.

[rbnyc]

46. There you go!

I also vote for option 3!

[CWebster]

3. Who is counting those ballots

anyway?

[imenja]

16. it's automatic

The DU machines. Want to try hacking the poll?

[RafterMan]

4. I was going to make the same poll

Thanks.

[IndianaGreen]

5. This is like asking a Roman what do you prefer: Empire or Republic?

Death to the Empire! Long Live the Republic!

[marcologico]

6. Option one, pull out ASAP. Who cares about Chimp, he's not running in 08.

I really don't think it's possible but I hope the hell it is.

[CWebster]

7. "stick with Kerry", huh?

That's not exactly the position he advocates.

[marcologico]

8. It is Kerry's position, and that's why I don't think it's possible in a

year. We're not doing enough to stabilize the country (training and rebuilding mainly, also working out deals with neighboring countries to assist).

[CWebster]

10. Why should we set up another police state or

have the contracts to rebuild.


This is an ancient and proud culture--the cradle of civilization. We should make restitution--garnish our wages, so to speak and they can rebuild themselves or ask for assistance from whomever they choose.

[marcologico]

34. Now that's Bush's solution, not Kerry's. Kerry is basing his exit strategy

on the premise of an intelligent design behind the occupation, which, clearly, there is not.

But at least it's an exit strategy.

[Azathoth]

9. I don't see how anyone could hope for unending chaos in Iraq

just to ruin Bush's legacy and prove his policies a failure. I'm more than willing to let Dubya crow about his success if it means a stable, peaceful, and democratic Iraq with a legitimate government. Sadly, I think the fact that Bush's policies ARE an unmitigated failure makes this little more than wishful thinking.

[imenja]

18. a majority have voted just that way

as I sadly suspected would happen, based on posts I've read on here. For some, hatred for Bush seems to outweigh a concern for human life. I certainly agree the policies are far more likely to fail, but there is nothing I would like better than to be proved wrong because that would mean many thousands of lives would be spared.

[imenja]

33. *

:kick:

[SoCalifer]

11. It Will End Up

As a news black-out because people who don't have anything to lose, and everything to gain, really have no choice but to continue their struggle. And if there's one thing that Arabs have shown during the last 40yrs, is that they don't give up.

It's their land and I believe they won't quit until they control it on their own terms. I just hope that this idiot in the White House and his dyslexic followers realize this sooner than later; that way less of our servicemen will have to die, and less poor people in Iraq will be killed.

[bemildred]

12. Push poll. nt

[RafterMan]

13. Push poll?

It's 50/50.

[bemildred]

14. The choice is a false one.

There is no necessary connection between the outcome in Iraq
and Bush's historical "legacy".

Edit: to be prefectly clear, Bush's policies ARE a failure, and we
may well see peace and democracy in Iraq despite him, in time.

[imenja]

19. I acknowledge that

in the original post. The points you raise are clearly made in the original post. What I'm trying to find out here is how many people oppose Bush because the policies are impractical and dangerous and how many have a hatred for Bush that surpasses all other concerns. This poll demonstrates that a small majority of voters fall into the latter category.

[bemildred]

20. I don't hate Bush.

It's him being pResident I don't like.

I could give a fig about him personally, I would not ever know
he exists but for his political office. Even in the case of
those that do "hate Bush", it seems unlikely that would have come
about except for his "public service".

The point being, I don't think you can seperate one's attitude to
Bush from his public actions, so I still think it's a false choice.
It's like asking if you "hate Britney Spears" apart from her public
performances, one would not think about Britney at all were she not
a public figure.

[imenja]

21. naturally this poll is about policy

His personal life is of no consequence to me.

[bemildred]

22. I thought you were finding out about "hatred for Bush". nt

[imenja]

23. yes, but in regard to his policy and presidency

not on a personal level. Some may hold animosity on both levels, but my concern here is about Iraq.

[bemildred]

24. So, the issue is:

Do you hate Bush's policies so much that you want them to fail in Iraq
even though it is bad for Iraqis for Bush's policies to fail in Iraq?

That is a bit twisted, I think. I hate Bush's policies BECAUSE they are
bad for Iraqis (and for citizens of the USA too.) I would not hate
Bush's policies if I thought they were good for Iraqis and US citizens.
So I suppose the answer is that "If Bush's policies were good for Iraqis
and US citizens then I would not object to them."

[imenja]

25. so you vote for the first option

if you choose to vote in this poll.

[bemildred]

29. Yeah, but I would not choose to vote in this poll.

Like all hypotheticals with a false premise, it is empty of meaning.

To be clear: the premise is that Bush's policies are or could be "good
for Iraq", I don't accept that premise.

[imenja]

30. ok

that's cool. There are plenty of polls I won't vote in for the same reason. I don't think it is empty of meaning, but I respect your view.

[bemildred]

31. Props for that.

:thumbsup:

[rocktivity]

43. I hate Bush's polices because they were DOOMED fo fail

was told so in no uncertain terms, and responded by firing anyone who disagreed with him, disenfranchised voters who might unseat him, and claimed he is doing God's work.

Stablility cannot return to Iraq UNLESS the Bush empire leaves--including control over their oils and the military bases that are being buit as a home base for taking over the rest of the Middle East.

:headbang:
rocknation

[bemildred]

45. Xactly. nt

[ctaylor]

51. not the question

The question isn't about whether Bush's policies are good or not.

If you had some magic button you could press and make Iraq free and our troops can pull out within the year, would you push the button?

I think most people would.

Now... If you have that magic button that can fix Iraq, but you know for certain that the history books will give Bush credit instead of you... do you still push the magic button?

[bemildred]

62. Sure, you push the button. But there is no such button.

The question demands that you think like a six year old.
That's what's wrong with it. We don't need any more six-year-old
thinking about Iraq, that's how we got into this mess.

[ctaylor]

64. Assuming the 6 yr. old understands the word "hypothetical"

yes

[bemildred]

66. The word is "magic".

This is magic thinking, you wish it and it's so,
no need to worry about the messy old real world.

[ThorsHammer]

15. Devil's Advocate: I think Bush *could* look good, but....

it will likely be more in the long term, retrospective view. IMO, even this won't be too rosy, as his justifications (at that time) didn't pan out, but *if* they have a working democracy, then it will look much better than it does now. It was encouraging to see the normal Iraqis braving the death threats, bombers, etc, and go out and vote, regardless of how valid they thought it was. However, if things spiral downward, Bush will look even worse, as neither his ends nor means worked out. I really hope democracy succeeds, but much more for the sake of the innocent Iraqis and the soldiers who have died, not for Bush's legacy.

[imenja]

17. that's precisely my view

I have opposed Bush because his policies seemed unrealistic and dangerous to me. I don't oppose the policies simply because I hate Bush. There is nothing I would like better than to be proved wrong, because that would mean many thousands of lives would be spared.
It seems a number of DU members hold an animosity for Bush that outweighs any sense for the common good or human life. It's scary actually.

[bunkerbuster1]

26. I like this poll.

I picked 1), of course, because I'm not so blinded by my loathing of this Administration that I want others to suffer needlessly under any circumstances.

The "pain" of tolerating a burnished Bush legacy would pale to the real pain felt by innocent folks caught in this horror.

[Mr. Grieves]

27. I replied for "chaos"

I replied in the "Iraq turns to chaos" category not because I feel the lives of American troops and Iraqis don't matter, but just to prove how pointless this war was. I don't like this deficit, and I don't want it to grow, but I think disaster or no disaster in Iraq, America will leave at roughly the same time period. I just felt I need to clarify a possibly important moral standpoint.

[imenja]

28. I don't follow your point here

Granted, the first option is unlikely to come true, but if it did, wouldn't that suggest the war is not as pointless as we now assume?

[GetTheRightVote]

32. It is all an illusion so face the reality of the war in Iraq

The elections were faked and most of the world knows it. * just wanted to look good so set up to steal elections in Iraq and put in his own man. LIES will never be justified and there will never be an Iraq because there was never a fair election to start it off. What I can not get over is all the people in the Democratic party who let the farces continue over and over and over again. Face the facts for once Party so we can move forward and fix this whole mess.

:kick:

[independentchristian]

35. I didn't vote

I need to know if Sistani's elections were legitimate, in that any Iraqi that ran was not handpicked by the US.

If they elected people who want to set up an islamic republic then I'd vote for the chaos because the Sunnis and Kurds will revolt.

[imenja]

36. option 1 assumes legitimate elections

It assumes a stable Iraq. Again, this is not a prediction of what you think will happen, but what you would like to happen.

[eridani]

37. Bush doesn't have a fucking clue about what Iraqis thought --

--they were voting for. What will happen if the election turns out not to mean what the Iraqis wanted it to mean?

http://dahrjamailiraq.com/weblog/archives/dispatches/000193.php

Referencing both figures, Ayar then added, “Percentages and numbers come only after counting and will be announced when it's over ... It's too soon to say that those were the official numbers.”

But this isn’t the most important misrepresentation the mainstream media committed.

What they also didn’t tell you was that of those who voted, whether they be 35% or even 60% of registered voters, were not voting in support of an ongoing US occupation of their country. In fact, they were voting for precisely the opposite reason. Every Iraqi I have spoken with who voted explained that they believe the National Assembly which will be formed soon will signal an end to the occupation.

And they expect the call for a withdrawing of foreign forces in their country to come sooner rather than later.

[imenja]

39. let's hope they are right n/t

[MHalblaub]

41. I voted for chaos

Sorry for the Iraqi people but success in Iraq will start just other unjustified wars.

[imenja]

42. any more votes?

:kick:

[rbnyc]

44. This poll just makes US look bad.

First of all, it's just not that simple. I can't pick either option. Number one in just not a possibility at this point. Anything resembling Democracy that emerges in the given situation is just illusory. In favor of Democracy, Iraq really has to start again from the ground up, and if the only legitimate role for the US, IMHO, is to rebuild infrastructure.

I can't pick number 2, because even though in the long term it will be better for the farce to crumble and for an illegal foreign policy to be shown as ineffective as well, it just looks bad. The option is badly phrased and in juxtaposition to an ideal that's not realizable at this point, just gives our opposition the opportunity to see us as people who want to be right at any cost.

Bad poll.

EDIT: typo

[BikeWriter]

48. You're right. It looks like something the freepers would crow about.

:(

[rbnyc]

49. Yep.

It functions as a trap. Not speculating about intentions.

[imenja]

52. see post #50.

[imenja]

53. see post #50.

[imenja]

50. I acknowledge your concerns

As I said, it is not meant to poll opinion of what DU members think is likely to happen. Most of us, it seems, believe the first option is very unlikely. Bush, however, obviously sees it otherwise. The point of this poll is to determine what we would like to see unfold in Iraq, and if disdain for Bush outweighs a desire to see a peaceful and Democratic outcome. Other members noted that they had wanted to create a similar poll, so it surveys opinions at least some have been wondering about. It seems to me it is possible, though unlikely, that Iraqis can create a representative government in spite of the US rather than because of us. Do you see that as a favorable outcome, even if it were to elevate Bush's stature? One voter noted that he selected the chaos option, because he believed success in Iraq would lead to a proliferation of unjust wars, which strikes me as a very reasonable argument.
You're quite right that nothing is as simple as this. Politics never fit into two idealized, polar categories. Polls have the tendency to reduce political thought to simplistic options, and I fully acknowledge this one does that. You shouldn't vote if you don't see the options presented as legitimate, but it does measure something--desired rather than likely outcome. Any maybe it prompts people to reflect a bit on their views.

[rbnyc]

56. Thanks, but still #1 is not a question of whether I think it's likely...

...I can't wish for it, because it would be wishing for an illusion to stand and justify something that has bad long-term implications.

And I don't think Bush thinks option 1 is likely either. What he thinks is likely is that illusions will be allowed to stand...and he's right. We've let all kinds of illusions stand, and it's not very good for democracy anywhere.

Anyway, thanks for your reply. And understand, I don't think you're trying to set us up to look bad, I just think it works that way.

[imenja]

57. and I understand and respect that point of view

If I had thought more carefully before designing the poll, I would have created more options to capture the very idea you express.

[rbnyc]

60. much appreciated. (nt)

[tk2kewl]

47. I think these poll results completely SUCK!

If you boil it down, as I see it, the question being asked is: Would you like to see the killing end, yes or no?

[twenty2strings]

54. I don't like this...It's like the "answer yes or no,have you stopped ...

beating your wife?" I want Bush to fail,but not that way. They are playing bait and switch. 3 card monte with America's short attention span. That's the story.

[rbnyc]

61. Good analogy! (nt)

[UdoKier]

55. Who the hell knows. Lots of illegitimate, undemocratic governments are...

Who the hell knows. Lots of illegitimate, undemocratic governments are "stable".

Just look at ours.

[KissMeKate]

58. OOPS! thought the poll called for predictions!

didnt read the whole post before voting. Is there anyway to retract my vote? I dont want chaos in Iraq- they are suffering enough already.

[BikeWriter]

59. The results of this are far too similar to a typical freeper remark...

"You LIEberals wood rathar see are troops all kilt then see Bush secede!"

I didn't vote.

[robbedvoter]

63. What a bullshit choice! Iraq was fine BEFORE - even had elections!

Now, hundreds of thousands victims later you are going to yell "legacy"?
No, dear. I ingested as much propaganda as I am ever gonna in my life.
W is a murderer, a war criminal and nothing good can come to Iraq or anyone from him. Thanks for playing.

[opihimoimoi]

65. The Freedom/election thing is a smokescreen. Recall before the

start of the war....there was NO TALK of Freedom and Liberty... its was ALL WMD and a threat to America....

Then it changed as there were no weapons to be found... It morphed guys...into this "We gonna give them Freedom" shit.

Its a smokescreen, a good one... but still a smokescreen.

The Ends does not justify the Means.... these guys are real sneaky...posing as good guys while robbing the piggy bank... gatta hand it to them....

[imenja]

67. I'm not questioning that

and that is not what this poll asks. It doesn't ask about the reasons for going to war or if it is justified. Read the what the thing asks. It is written in English.
I have never supported this war and actively protested it for months before we invaded. But your notion that Iraq was "fine" before the war is nothing short of moronic. That doesn't mean it was our business to overturn their government. But your contention that Iraq under Saddam was "fine" shows a contempt for human rights that is appalling. Thank goodness most on the left are not so callous, or we would never win an election again, nor would we deserve to win. Go to Amnesty International to read about human rights abuses in Iraq under Saddam and those since the US invasion. Why you think it's necessary to legitimate Saddam to oppose the war is unfathomable to me. There are many good critiques to raise on the US invasion and occupation. Saying that Saddam "fine" only undermines the effectiveness of the anti-war argument and moral opposition to the war. It also shows a disregard for human life that is frightening. Opposition to one murderer, Bush, doesn't legitimate excusing the actions of another.
This poll is getting at a simple question. It does not ask about a likely outcome or justification of the war. It does not pretend to lay out any probable resolution for the war. It simply asks which of two very hypothetical outcomes would you prefer. It is intended to see how many people on this site would like to see stability and a quick withdraw of American troops, despite whatever credit Bush might claim, or if their hatred for Bush outweighs everything else.

If you don't like the poll, just ignore it. All you succeed in doing is bumping it back to the top of the forum.