Is the surge working? Let's ask Iraqis!

[Che Guava]

...you only get one guess as to what they said...

US 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".

link

The United States has increased the number of its forces in Baghdad and surrounding provinces in the past six months. Please tell me if you think this increase of forces has made it better, worse, or had no effect?"


And now for the skeptics, here is the actual questionnaire used, with the breakdown of opinions, and a page of graphics for the poll

And now the discussion. Look like a pretty damning opinion of the surge, and some pretty bleak opinions of the future from Iraqis. What do you think the US and allies take from this poll? Do you think that it is an accurate representation of the sentiments of the Iraqi people?

 

[Bill3000]

Wait, how would the surge make it worse? Wouldn't it at the least mean that it had no effect on increasing security, and that it already was in the process of deteriorating?

 

[Che Guava]

Wait, how would the surge make it worse? Wouldn't it at the least mean that it had no effect on increasing security, and that it already was in the process of deteriorating?

A good question: perhaps they mean that an increased US presence has stirred up the militias and made a more tense situation. Maybe they mean that things were deteriorating already, but the pace of deterioration has increased since that time (coincidentally or not).

 

[MobBoss]

So, in the face of more troops, better security, and even the mahdi army calling for a six month moritorium on operations.....things still suck.

Btw, if the surge is concentrating on Bhagdad......why are they polling everyone across Iraq on how its working?

And the odd thing is they say things suck....but more than half (53%) still want US forces to stay? Odd that.

Heh, and 54% of the shia think things are going well in their lives. But things still suck....

/go figure.

 

[Che Guava]

So, in the face of more troops, better security, and even the mahdi army calling for a six month moritorium on operations.....things still suck.

Aparently, that's what they think...

Btw, if the surge is concentrating on Bhagdad......why are they polling everyone across Iraq on how its working?

I'm going to assume that increased security and peace in baghdad would mean a more efficient government and beaurocracy, the effects of which would be felt in other provinces.

And the odd thing is they say things suck....but more than half (53%) still want US forces to stay? Odd that.

I guess things could be worse

Heh, and 54% of the shia think things are going well in their lives. But things still suck....

I guess the other half are the ones that think that attacking US troops is acceptable...

/go figure.

Indeed!

 

[Stevenpfo]

So, in the face of more troops, better security, and even the mahdi army calling for a six month moritorium on operations.....things still suck.

Btw, if the surge is concentrating on Bhagdad......why are they polling everyone across Iraq on how its working?

And the odd thing is they say things suck....but more than half (53%) still want US forces to stay? Odd that.

Heh, and 54% of the shia think things are going well in their lives. But things still suck....

/go figure.

I always await your responses to Iraqi threads MB. They're either informational or they're heavily skewed to making things look good for the US (no matter what).

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 poll was conducted in more than 450 neighborhoods across all 18 provinces of Iraq in August, and has a margin of error of + or - 2.5%.

...Would suggest to me that they took the info from the areas affected by the surge from those 450 neighborhoods and used it to get the first quote.

 

[MobBoss]

...Would suggest to me that they took the info from the areas affected by the surge from those 450 neighborhoods and used it to get the first quote.

The surge isnt being done in all neighborhoods in all provinces. It is centered almost exclusively in and around Bhagdad, where the vast majority of violence is committed.

I always await your responses to Iraqi threads MB. They're either informational or they're heavily skewed to making things look good for the US (no matter what).

I am not trying to make things look good for the US here....but as usual, these polls dont match up with what I hear from soldiers returning from there, nor are they very consistent with other things that occur - like the UK reducing the number of troops in some provinces because there is simply no longer a need for them there (no violence...no need for troops in certain locations).

I also find the timing of this report rather coincidental to the iminent release of General Petraeus report dont you think? Do you really think such things are coincidental? Usually not.

 

[Stevenpfo]

The surge isnt being done in all neighborhoods in all provinces. It is centered almost exclusively in and around Bhagdad, where the vast majority of violence is committed.

I understand that. What i'm saying is that I agree (with you) that the poll was done in all of Iraq. But is it inconceivable that they took the info from the areas within the surge's AOR and used that to get the first quote?

 

[nonconformist]

Raargh BBC institutional bias against america raargh

 

[skadistic]

This rises to 93% among Sunni Muslims compared to 50% for Shia.

That says alot right there.

 

[Tank_Guy#3]

And now the discussion. Look like a pretty damning opinion of the surge, and some pretty bleak opinions of the future from Iraqis. What do you think the US and allies take from this poll? Do you think that it is an accurate representation of the sentiments of the Iraqi people?

Or it could be that some Iraqi's want us out, and they're going to use the most effective means of making us do so, influencing public opinion stateside. No I don't believe it is as bad as they make it out to be.

I understand that. What i'm saying is that I agree (with you) that the poll was done in all of Iraq. But is it inconceivable that they took the info from the areas within the surge's AOR and used that to get the first quote?

They should ask the people that the surge is affecting, not the entire country. It doesn't make sense to ask Iraqi's not affected by the surge as to whether or not it's working, because if none of the "Surge troops" were sent to their area, how could it directly affect the terrorist activity in their area?

Asking an Iraqi not affected about the surge, about how effective the surge is, is like asking a Tibetan monk that has never left his Himalayan monastery how he likes the tropical weather in Australia.

 

[Che Guava]

The surge isnt being done in all neighborhoods in all provinces. It is centered almost exclusively in and around Bhagdad, where the vast majority of violence is committed.

It would be nice to see a breakdown by province. Has anyone actually gotten all the way through that pdf?

I am not trying to make things look good for the US here....but as usual, these polls dont match up with what I hear from soldiers returning from there,

True, but I imagine that the experiences of soldiers and Iraqi citizens are probably quite different.

nor are they very consistent with other things that occur - like the UK reducing the number of troops in some provinces because there is simply no longer a need for them there (no violence...no need for troops in certain locations).

Keep in mind, of course, that there are other things driving a UK withdrawl; notably, opinion polls in Britain. Perhaps what this poll best demostrates is a bit of a contrast between opinions on what progress is...

I also find the timing of this report rather coincidental to the iminent release of General Petraeus report dont you think? Do you really think such things are coincidental? Usually not.

Of course not! And what's wrong with that? A good report like this should be timely and relevant to current events, should it not? If Patreus is giving us one view of the situation on the ground, it is good to have something to compare it with...

Or it could be that some Iraqi's want us out, and they're going to use the most effective means of making us do so, influencing public opinion stateside. No I don't believe it is as bad as they make it out to be.

Except that, as MB pointed out, over half still want the US to stay. If it were indeed the case that most Iraqis that answered this poll simply wanted to the US out, wouldn't they have answered this question a little differently?

 

[JollyRoger]

I say we give everybody in the U.S. still supporting Bush on this one Iraqi citizenship and have a surge of supporters of the surge on the ground in Iraq.

 

[Stewbert 08]

Wait, how would the surge make it worse?

I think they mean the situation has gotten worse. And US troops are pretty much powerless to affect it.

better security

Except, you know, not.

the UK reducing the number of troops in some provinces because there is simply no longer a need for them there

Can you please private message me to say if you actually believe that crap or are you desperately spinning? Because damn.... if you aren't... my head sure is.

iminent

I wouldn't use that word if I were you.

 

[Bill3000]

I think they mean the situation has gotten worse. And US troops are pretty much powerless to affect it.

The question clearly asks "if you think this increase of forces has made [the situation in Iraq] better, worse, or had no effect." In this context, "powerless" would mean "no effect".

 

[Che Guava]

The question clearly asks "if you think this increase of forces has made [the situation in Iraq] better, worse, or had no effect." In this context, "powerless" would mean "no effect".

Well, then I think that it is likely that Iraqis believe, rightly or wrongly, that increased US troop presence in Iraq has made thier lives more difficult, perhaps by inciting street battles just by being there.

 

[FriendlyFire]

I hear from soldiers returning from there, nor are they very consistent with other things that occur - like the UK reducing the number of troops in some provinces because there is simply no longer a need for them there (no violence...no need for troops in certain locations).

WTH ???
EDIT: On second read you actually wrote that troop reductions in some providences. I see most the media had focused on Basara and the intense fighting down there which recieved a lot of coverage being the second (4th?) largest city in Iraq. we might as well have both sides the good and the bad before making judgments. (yeah me included)

A British military commander in Iraq has said his forces could have withdrawn from Basra Palace five months ago if the Americans had not issued a plea for them to stay.

Brigadier James Bashall said pressure from Washington meant the troops stayed in the exposed outpost for longer than was necessary.

His comments will inflame tensions between the US and British Governments.

American officials have accused Britain of accepting defeat in southern Iraq and watching Basra descend into "all-out warfare".

He claimed that the decision to remain in Basra was a consequence of "political strategy being played out at highest level" which resulted in the troops in the Palace fighting in some of the most intense urban warfare experienced since WW2.

Last month, a senior US officer said to be "familiar" with Gen Petraeus's thinking told the Sunday Telegraph: "The short version is that the Brits have lost Basra, if indeed they ever had it.

Hitting back at criticisms from US officials, Brig Bashall, a former Parachute Regiment officer who has experienced three tours of Iraq, said it was "nonsense" to suggest Britain's retreat from Basra Palace had been a defeat.

"We have fought for the last three months a very violent campaign against insurgents and we left on our own terms. "We are definitely not defeated."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/li...ews.html?in_article_id=480949&in_page_id=1811

 

[EdCase]

100% of the 60% of the 25% of the Iraqis within reach of a pencil agree..polls are the most pointless tools ever devised.
The surge will have worked when no more servicemen/women of any nationality die pointlessly.

 

[Bronx Warlord]

Having operated in Al-Anbar in 04 and again in 06 and 07 I can say... this is rather amuseing.

 

[FriendlyFire]

Having operated in Al-Anbar in 04 and again in 06 and 07 I can say... this is rather amuseing.

Hey!

I thought you said you served your second tour in Kuiwait training Iraqis there ?
anyway good to see you posting. At least you get a year off between tours. (though it might change pending what happens with Petraues asking to keep the surge level at its current 168,000 mark)

EDIT: And yes Iam waiting for the offical word from Petraues and hes report. Like hes confirmation I bet hes report will please neither the democrats, republicans nor Bush administration.