72% of American troops say we should exit Iraq within 6 months.

[MGKrebs]

I just came across this Zogby poll of American G.I.'s from February. There is some amazing stuff in here.

"An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and more than one in four say the troops should leave immediately,"

"85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,"

http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

Yikes!

[Imagevision]

1. What does the US. expect to accomplish in 6 months??

[kenny blankenship]

9. It would take about that long to leave if you started tomorrow

and anyway, all this "phased deployment" stuff is a bunch of crap unless the true goal behind it is to get out and get out really fast. I love the fact that they're not saying when it's to end, just when it's to begin (4-6 months). If you draw down troops without having the goal of getting them all out without any more casualties, then smaller numbers of troops left in the country just means MORE VULNERABLE TROOPS.

The troops have it right: get them out ASAP or fundamentally change their mission. This level of force isn't working, hasn't been working, can't work and won't work. You could propose doubling the number of troops tp 300,000 and make an argument that the mission could then somehow be completed successfully (I tend to doubt it but one could at least argue it plausibly) But this country is in no mood for an escalation after 3 years of a failed policy. So what to do? Either bring them home quickly or come up with some new plan for "victory" but the idea of a dwindling presence that makes the troops more vulnerable, and/or forces them to do even less to keep the lid on Iraq's civil war is typical political "split the difference" bullshit.

[tabasco]

2. No surprise to me.

All the Army people I know hate miserable Iraq and the people who sent them there.

[elperromagico]

3. Oh my God! Do you know what that means?

The troops don't support the troops!!!

[skipos]

4. The troops are sending the wrong message to our troops. nt

[LynnTheDem]

5. FUCK YOU BUSH. "85% say to retaliate for Saddam's role in 911"

Saddam, as the entire world outside the USA has ALWAYS KNOWN, had nothing-not one damn thing whatsoever- to do with the 911 attacks.

BUSH LIED CONSTANTLY to tie Iraq to 911. And Americans are DEAD NOW because of bush's LIES. 85% of our troops think they are in Iraq because of Saddam's part in 911 in which IN FACT Saddam had NO PART WHATSOEVER.

FUCK YOU BUSH.

FUCK YOU FREEPERS.

FUCK YOU ALL RIGHTWINGNUTS.

American soldiers DEAD for LIES, you motherfuckers!

[twilight_sailing]

8. The higher ups have been lying to the troops,

trying to give them a reason to fight. That is the only explanation that makes sense.

[karlrschneider]

6. 85 percent? Kerry was right without meaning to be.

One of my neighbor kids just got back from Iraq (safely and fortunately) but he still thinks Saddam
was responsible for 9/11. I told him he's an idiot and he got pissed off. Then I said, "fine, go
fight the wrong people for the wrong reasons and don't bitch at me when your brain starts working."
Bah.

[silverojo]

10. It isn't just because Bush lied to them

If they get any news from any major news source in the world, they would know that Bush is lying.

I mean, really: "85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks."

In other words, 85% of them are right-wing idiots who won't listen to the truth that's been told for the last few years. They'll vote for Republicans again and again, because they think John Kerry and the Democrats are evil.

Sure, Bush lied...but there's nothing forcing those people to BELIEVE his lies.

[troublemaker]

12. To be fair. I would probably have voted with the 85%

"the U.S. mission is mainly to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks"

The word "mission" has a specific military meaning. The mission is what your higher-ups say the mission is. Even if you think the mission is bullshit and based on lies it is still "the mission."

If the poll question were whether "the U.S. mission is mainly to retaliate locate Saddam’s WMD" it would be no more or less rational than the other one. Both are missions based on nonexistant facts. The fact that Saddam was not connected to 9/11 doesn't change the mission, it just means that the mission was insane.


"The mission" comes from the top down, so the real question here is why these guys were TOLD that 9/11 revenge their mission.

[MGKrebs]

13. I hope you are right I guess.

At least from that perspective we can believe that the G.I.'s can see through the bullshit. The alternative is that they believe this despite what they are being told their mission is, and "retaliation" means "punishment" and opens up a whole Pandora's box of problems.

[Webster Green]

7. I guess they are all unpatriotic traitors..

According to little lord pissypants

[CAG]

11. Don't forget that Limbo, Hannity, O'Leilly, Coulter, and would call

them this as well....