Only 35% of Americans support a timetable for withdrawl.

[Clarkie1]

(CNN) -- As President Bush launched a new effort Wednesday to gain public support for the Iraq war, a new poll found most Americans do not believe he has a plan that will achieve victory.

But the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll released Wednesday night also found nearly six in 10 Americans said U.S. troops should not be withdrawn from Iraq until certain goals are achieved.

Just 35 percent wanted to set a specific timetable for their exit, as some critics of the war have suggested.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Most American's share the view of Clark that a timetable is inappropriate at this time, but so is "staying the course." We need to change our strategy in order to achieve our goals, and Democrats ought to be united in advancing a clear of stategy for in Iraq a majority of Americans will be comfortable supporting. We need to show the Democratic Party stands for goals being achieved in Iraq, but we have a better, more enlightened, more multi-faceted, and smarter alternative to the Bush Doctrine's tunnel-vision and overreliance on the military to achieve our goals. Thoughts?

[stepnw1f]

1. I Think That's Bull (nt)

[Harper_is_Bush]

5. What's bull is the poll itself.

Democrats keep saying a timetable should be tied to events...such as elections.

Bush and the rest of his repukes keep coming back saying there should be no timetables, although at the same time Bush says when an event happens (Iraqis trained) then US begins to withdraw.

It's just like that vote-stunt they pulled. Designed to misinform, and it worked.

[stepnw1f]

6. I Meant the Poll Itself is Bull (nt)

[Harper_is_Bush]

8. Ah. Thought you meant the result. n/t

[stepnw1f]

9. That Too... (nt)

[Clarkie1]

7. I think it would be unwise to dismiss the findings of this poll outright

simply because some here may not like the findings.

[Harper_is_Bush]

10. I'm not dismissing the findings at all...

I'm saying it's understandable given the misinformation Bush and his band of repukes have been pushing.

Timetable = Bad.
Timetable = wrong message to terrorists
Timetable = Zarquawi rules Iraq.

It's kind of like how a majority of Americans thought Saddam and OBL were pals or that Saddam had something to do with 9/11.

Purposeful, controlled disinformation campaign with predictable results.

[Clarkie1]

14. O.k., I understand what you are saying.

Although I don't necessarily agree.

I think the American people as a whole are smarter than you are giving them credit for. I don't think anyone who thinks a rigid timetable is a bad idea has necessarily been manipulated by a disinformation campaign, so we have a difference of opinion there.

[ProudDad]

47. I've been watching the antics

of the american people for over 40 years:

Johnson and Viet-Nam, Nixon, Reagan, Bush I, Bush II...

They f*ckin' idiots who haven't a clue as to what their own best interests are...

[Clarkie1]

11. Is the part of the poll that says Bush's plan won't work also bull? eom

[tocqueville]

2. the timetable is a red herring, a plan is the main issue

if the plan is good the withdrawal will be sooner and the losses minimized

[Clarkie1]

16. "if the plan is good the withdrawl will be sooner and the losses minimized

You are absolutely correct!

[Cha]

3. Bullshit...The Majority of Americans want

us out of Iraq.

What's changed in the last day?

[Clarkie1]

4. Yes, the majority want us out of Iraq...

but only when certain goals are acheived.

[ProudDad]

48. WHAT GOALS??????

[enough already]

12. Nothing has changed

This poll is bullshit

[Clarkie1]

15. Yes, the majority want us out of Iraq...

when certain goals have been acheived.

Do you think the part of the poll finding that most Americans don't believe Bush's plan will work is also BS?

[bahrbearian]

13. A few months ago Clark was on Meet the Press saying we

need a timetable just like the one he had in Kosovo, I call B,S also. Clark does believe in a time table established by the neighbors of Iraq.

[welshTerrier2]

17. i like this poll better

by the way, the numbers are MUCH higher among Democrats!! btw, the poll was taken BEFORE MURTHA'S SPEECH and before Pelosi endorsed Murtha's plan ... pretty high numbers for a position criticized by both major parties ...

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/11/02/opinion/polls/main1005327_page2.shtml?CMP=ILC-SearchStories
(scroll down for this poll)

U.S. TROOPS IN IRAQ SHOULD…

Stay as long as it takes
Now 43%
10/2005 36%
9/2005 42%
2/2005 55%
6/2004 54%

Leave as soon as possible
Now 50%
10/2005 59%
9/2005 52%
2/2005 40%
6/2004 40%

[Clarkie1]

18. "Leave as soon as POSSIBLE" is poor and ambiguous wording.

Which makes this whole poll of little worth, in my opinion.

Does leave as soon as possible mean leave as soon as it is possible without significant risk of Iraq descending into chaos (i.e., "when certain goals are met"), or does it means as soon as it is physically possible to do so? Big difference.

[welshTerrier2]

20. Americans have had it with Iraq

i've seen other polls with almost identical results ... one said something like "would you support leaving Iraq ASAP even if it meant leaving without creating stability" ... something like 60% wanted out ... iirc, it was over 70% among Dems ...

the House Dems will soon organize behind Murtha's call for withdrawal ... if there is to be any official Dem position and Party unity, other Dems better hop aboard before it's too late ...

[Clarkie1]

21. Maybe so, but I'd like to see a link for that poll you just cited. n/t

[welshTerrier2]

23. here's a couple of links ...

here's some info: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/16/opinion/polls/main855969.shtml

here's some info by party:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/10/opinion/polls/main930772.shtml

"Democrats and Republicans find themselves on different sides of the issue. 61% of Republicans want the U.S. to stay in Iraq for as long as it takes, while 73% of Democrats want U.S. troops out as soon as possible."

btw, the "leave ASAP" had verbiage, iirc, that said something like "leave ASAP even if Iraq wasn't fully stabilized" ... not my favorite wording either but i think it's pretty clear most Americans have had more than enough of this madness ...

[skipos]

19. DU doesn't represent your average American. The poll isnt a surprise.

I have no problem recognizing that while most Americans think Iraq was started on misinformation and is going badly, they don't support the "immediate withdrawl, no exceptions" plan that most DUers support.

[FrenchieCat]

22. Clark is for benchmarks, But, I find all of this bickering irrelevant...

and that those who believe that Pandora's box can just be closed up....don't understand why it's being called Pandora's box. Cause once out, the shit can't just be stuffed back in the box, and then somehow, we can just return to going about our business.

The simple truth is that it is the American people who will end up setting a timetable for withdrawal themselves as Bush continues to flounder.....and flop along on his ill conceived course. The American people are becoming impatient and want to see troups moving out. As it was in Vietnam, it is the people that will see this Debacle to its end....

So I request that the "out this instance" and "out tomorrow" and "out six months from now" and "just out when" folks understand that the goal, if we are to be united together as a real force to be reckoned with, is to make sure this admin knows that "getting the fuck out ASAP" needs to be their goals. Our other goal has got to be to get rid of this Republican majority who where most instrumental in getting us into this Pandemonium from Hell.

What's MOST important is for the people to continue to apply pressure on this administration to get us out of there--Doesn't really matter what we are shouting as long as we are loud......and keep pressure on this Majority Republican Congress in demanding a full investigation on how we got there in the first place.

Click on the link on my sig and sign the petition that does just that....

[Tom Rinaldo]

25. I'm also more interested in supporting the petition than in arguing this

Clark has been very clear about not attacking other Democrats who have different ideas about how to get us out of Iraq in the best way possible. Democrats control no branch of National Government currently. What we have the power to do right now is hold this government accountable for it's mistakes. Clark knows the people of Iraq don't want the United States to stay in Iraq for long if at all. He knows that a large American presence, or virtually any presence, there draws resistance to us and spurs on Al Quada recruitment. Clark has his own ideas about how strategically we can get out of Iraq soonest with the least amount of lasting damage to all concerned, and he has his reasons for them, but he does not start fights with Democrats who have other ideas about it. He understands that we have to work together to keep pressure on Bush's Administration and work together to elect more Democrats in 2006.

[karynnj]

24. It is very easy to get the results you want by the way you word the

questions. Look at the bias - timeline vs meeting goals. The fact is that Feingold and Kerry both predicate their withdrawals on goals being met. I don't know in Murtha's case.

[welshTerrier2]

29. Murtha's plan is not conditional on future events in Iraq

his only focus is the safety of the troops ...

Pelosi, who has endorsed Murtha's resolution, was asked by John Stewart on last night's TDS what Murtha meant by the term "practicable" ...

Pelosi said "practicable date means withdrawal completed within 6 months" ...

[Darranar]

26. Most Americans may share Clark's view that Iraq belongs to us.

However, it does not - it belongs to the people who inhabit it.

No percentage of the American people has the right to deny Iraqis their sovereign right to their country.

Leave their country to them, and cease attempting to impose a brutal puppet government upon them. That is the only moral option, not a mere change in the tactics used to subdue and repress them.

[Clarkie1]

27. Neither most Americans nor Clark share that view.

Certainly, Iraq belongs to the Iraqis.

One of the key points in Clark's strategy is a public comittment by the American government that there will be no military bases in Iraq. Certainly Clark, other Dems, and all concerned Americans want a change in course that is a win-win for Iraq as well as America. A good plan will get America out sooner, not later. We never belonged there in the first place.

However, the problem we created belongs to all of us. An ethical person does not go into someone's house, destroy it, and then leave without helping (or at least offering to help) clean it up.

[Darranar]

30. The US is not an ethical country.

It is not fixing anything, it is proceeding to destroy that which it missed the first time, and shooting any of the inhabitants who happen to resist, and plenty who don't as well.

[Clarkie1]

31. Maybe not, but I want my country to become an ethical one. n/t

[Darranar]

34. There is no such entity.

But one thing that theoretical ethical country would not do is impose its will upon any people, whatever the excuses given.

[lostnfound]

50. What a wonderful thought.

I really liked it.

[Tom Rinaldo]

28. If you are this clueless about who is basically on your side

God help us all if you are representing many others. Clark fought to keep us out of Iraq and he supports us leaving Iraq. There may be people who think Iraq belongs to us but you know damn well Clark isn't one of them. Disagree with his opinion on how we should get out all you want, that's an honest debate, but saying that it is Clark's opinion that Iraq belongs to us is not debating, it is lying.

[Darranar]

32. I am sorry if you think I am being too hard on Clark.

I think the same of all the politicians who support maintaining the occupation.

Clark had the courage to denounce the Second Fallujah Massacre, if in terms far too mild, so that elevates him other some others, but still does not change the observation.

I stand by my statement that the position that the US has the "right" to continue its attempts to dominate Iraq is indeed equivalent to the position that Iraq belongs to us.

[Clarkie1]

33. What if most Iraqis want us to leave as soon as their country is stable?

Edit: If you know anything about Clark's strategy, you know that one of it's key components is a comittment NOT to dominate Iraq militarily.

[Darranar]

35. Their country will not be stable

as long as the US remains, unless the "stability" is the stability of huge-scale murder to annihilate any possibility of serious resistance (say, the nuclear annihilation of Iraq) - an action which is not on the table, thankfully.

For what it's worth the Iraqis, like any other people when faced with brutal invaders, oppose the continuation of the occupation.

[Clarkie1]

37. Do the majority of Iraqis want us to leave tomorrow?

It's a question I want to have answered. If you have solid evidence, please provide a link.

Also, I edited my previous post to debunk an outrageous statement you made.

[Darranar]

41. I have no proof.

The closest thing I have seen as far as polls is the 80% figure, which did not ask precisely that question.

My guess, however, is that like any other people the Iraqi people are opposed to a murderous foreign army seeking to dominate their country, and support its immediate withdrawal.

[welshTerrier2]

36. here's my position on this question

i think Dems should be pushing bush to include a referendum of the Iraqi people on whether the US stays or goes ... it's THEIR call if they want us to leave ...

if they ASK us to stay, then, and only then, the American people have a CHOICE to make ...

polls i've seen have indicated 80% of the Iraqi people want us to leave their country; another 45% believe it's OK to injure and kill their American occupiers ... if we're not going to base our policy on polls, we should allow the Iraqi people to choose via a referendum ...

[Clarkie1]

39. I agree with the referendum idea, but it's only weeks before the election.

I'm still not certain that 80% want us to leave tomorrow. I have no doubt they want us to leave "as soon as possible." We all want that.

[Tom Rinaldo]

38. Why are we having this debate here now?

Clark is not arguing with fellow Democrats about Iraq, and he very intentionally is not arguing with Democrats who favor a date driven withdrawal or an immediate pull out. He is working closely with many Democrats who have somewhat different views than his own about Iraq, to find common ground and a strategy that will help us all take power away from the Bush regime and allow us to actually influence what happens in Iraq rather than just scream against it. Accenting differences that exist among out of Iraq Democrats goes exactly cross purpose to the goal that Clark is pursuing right now with Democrats in Congress. People should look at the letter Clark sent out supporting a petition now before Congress. He isn't stressing our differences, he is strengthening our unity while respecting our differences.

[Darranar]

40. Neither Clark nor the Democratic Party leadership is "us."

Certainly not on Iraq policy, as a cursory glance at the last decade should prove.

Regardless of the party affiliation of the presidential figurehead aiming at domination of Iraq, I will still oppose the attempt.

[Tom Rinaldo]

43. I got where you are coming from already

Not that I mind you answering, but my question wasn't really directed toward you. I know why you are having this debate, I was just saying that Clark himself is not distancing himself from those who are advocating a different exit strategy than his, and he is not fighting with them over who is most right. He gives supporting reasons to his own opinion, but he honors the efforts of all Democrats who are fighting the Bush regimes policies in Iraq, who are trying to bring Americans home. That is why I asked why are we having this debate here now, Clark is trying to keep the debate focused against the Bush Administration, not other Democrats.

[Clarkie1]

45. Great question.

My intent was not to start an argument; it was to keep the focus of discussions here on DU grounded in reality as much as possible. The reality being that most Americans do not support the immediate, unconditional withdrawl that many here on DU are beginning to use as a kind of litmus test. Which is silly, because as you point out we are of course not the ones setting the policy. Every Democrat critical of "staying the course" is putting pressure on the Administration to change course somehow, and that is what is most important.

My opening post was particularly directed toward that segment of DU which does seem intent on dividing the Democratic Party by disowning any Democrat who does not support either:

a. A fixed, speedy timetable for withdraw independent of events on the ground in Iraq, or

b. Immediate withdraw

Again, my intent was not to start an argument, but to open some minds to the possibility that ALL Democrats have something better to offer the American people.

[Darranar]

42. True. Bush is against US military domination of Iraq, too.

Both aim to do it by proxy.

My guess is that Clark would do it far more competently, and probably with less loss of life.

[Clarkie1]

46. That's not true.

Bush has not made a commitment to no military bases in Iraq after "total victory." :puke:

[YoungDemocrat]

44. Huh

Well, I think a timetable on one hand makes a solid statement. On the other hand, a timetable perhaps restricts the process in Iraq too much, resulting in a botched job. Rather than a timetable, I also support a solid strategy accompanied by estimates of time. This doesn't put a large amount of pressure on the process but if the estimates are good, they reassure America and insure that we will be out of there sometime.

[ProudDad]

49. I heard all of these arguments during Viet-Nam

We can't tie the hands of our generals. We can't leave because we'd leave the country in chaos. We broke it, we own it.

None of that crap was true then and it's not true now.

If you broke into someone's house, dumped all of their clothes and household goods on the floor and pissed on them, crashed all of their dishes and cookware onto the kitchen floor and shit on them, tore up their furniture, kept the family bound and gagged in the fetal position in the closet in their own filth, crapped in their toilet until it overflowed on their bedding... I don't think "staying the course" would help things much.

the first act to undo what you've done would be to get the hell out of there so they could have their lives back!