[lit-ideas] Re: See SAW
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 22:59:28 -0700
Yeah, but I wonder which news sources are influencing them. Are any of them
pro-American? We paid for Al Iraqiya; so that one should be okay, but is
it? We can't expect Al Jazeera to be pro-US. Al Arabiya is from that city
that we would let run our ports. Are they still our ally. The BBC wasn't
pro US the last time I checked - oh maybe in spots. I think CNN is safe.
But notice that this doesn't add up to 100 and it doesn't indicate which
source they trust:
2. Which are the channels that you received at home without difficulties?
Total
Baghdad
Shi'ite areas
Sunni areas
Kurdish areas
Al Iraqiya
84%
92
89
84
52
Al Jazeera
33%
38
22
44
34
Al Arabiya
33%
38
22
44
33
BBC
15%
9
11
19
16
CNN
9%
9
7
11
10
But back to the point: I asked Andreas, "Are you arguing that the largely
Shiite government doesn't want our continued support?"
Andreas seemed to think he was providing evidence that the Shiite government
didn't want our continued support, but nothing he provided contained that
evidence. I responded to his note and then reposted it when Andreas lost
it.
One of the messages Andreas posted indicates a timetable:
<http://www.juancole.com/2005/11/iraqis-ask-for-withdrawal-timetable-ap.html
>
http://www.juancole.com/2005/11/iraqis-ask-for-withdrawal-timetable-ap.html
"they said that the withdrawal would be completed over a period of two years
(i.e. November 2007). This timetable, al-Hayat says, appears actually to
have been put forward by the Americans themselves."
All along we have said that we would leave when they could handle their own
problems. We would provide ongoing support until they could handle things
on their own. They say the same thing in the website Andreas posted, "We
demand the withdrawal of foreign forces in accordance with a timetable, and
the establishment of a national and immediate program for rebuilding the
armed forces through drills, preparation and being armed, on a sound basis
that will allow it to guard Iraq's borders and to get control of the
security situation . . ."
Lawrence
-----Original Message-----
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Omar Kusturica
Sent: Saturday, May 06, 2006 10:17 PM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: See SAW
--- Lawrence Helm <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Question 23 may be the most revealing of the lot.
> It asks whether the
> US/British invasion of Iraq was worth it (despite
> whatever hardships they
> suffered) to get rid of Saddam. 74% of the Shiites
> and 97% of the Kurds
> said it was worth it. Only 28% of the Sunnis said
> it was worth it.
*Not quite accurate. Question 23. reads:
23. Thinking about any hardships you might have
suffered since the US/British invasion, do you
personally think that ousting Saddam Hussein was worth
it or not?
And here the answers are as you cite, but there is no
reference to the US invasion in the question. However,
to question 3:
3. Taking everything into account, do you think the
coalition invasion of Iraq has done more harm than
good or more good than harm?
Here 47 % of the Shiite and 56 % answer "more harm."
In total 46 % answer "more harm" 33 % "more good" and
16 % "the same."
O.K.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
