The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 23, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Dirty Little Secrets Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll
James Dunnigan    3/19/2004 7:32:16 AM

A large scale opinion survey in Iraq, sponsored by several foreign media networks, found that 70 percent of Iraqis thought they were doing well, and 56 percent believed life was better than before the war. Some 70 percent were optimistic about the future.



Iraqis are glad to see Saddam gone, but upset that foreigners had to do it. Thus 49 percent thought the coalition invasion was justified, while 39 percent think it was wrong. While 41.8 percent said the war liberated Iraq, 41.2 percent said Iraq was humiliated. Only 39 percent wanted foreign troops to remain in the country. As for the attacks on foreign troops, 17 percent approved (21 percent of Iraqi Arabs approved of this, but only two percent of Iraqi Kurds.) Overall, 78 percent said the attacks on coalition troops were unacceptable, although that went up to 96.6 percent for attacks on Iraqi police. Understandably, lack of law and order is seen as the most pressing need (22.1 percent of respondents), followed by unemployment (11.8 percent), inflation (9.5 percent), electricity shortages (4.2 percent), housing problems (4.1 percent) and the quality of infrastructure (water supply, road repair and so on, 3.7 percent). The events that make headlines outside of Iraq mean little to the average Iraqi, as only 1.8 percent thought terrorist attacks were the most important issue in their lives, and only .2 percent were concerned about religious and ethnic strife inside Iraq.



Only 20 percent of Iraqis wanted an Islamic state, and 75 percent wanted a strong, unified state, without special privileges for Kurds or anyone else. Religious leaders are trusted the most (by 42.4 percent), and coalition forces the least (4.3 percent). Iraqis now want democratically elected leaders (55.3 percent), but even more they want a strong leader. Saddam Hussein is still respected for his "power" by many Iraqis. While 15.1 percent of Iraqis want coalition forces to leave immediately, 53.3 percent want them to stay until a functioning Iraqi government is in place, or peace is restored to the country.



The survey was conducted by Iraqis, who were hired and trained by the polling organization, Oxford Research International. One thing the survey makes very clear is that most foreign media reporting on Iraq are reporting what they want to see the Iraqi people thinking, not what the Iraqis are actually thinking. This, however, is not unique to Iraq, although European and Arab media tend to be even more distorted in their reporting than is usually the case.

 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT
American Kafir    About those war protests...   3/20/2004 3:33:28 PM
March Marching By Lowell Ponte FrontPageMagazine.com | March 19, 2004 EACH MID-MARCH THE BUZZARDS RETURN to Hinckley, Ohio, and radical Leftists return to the streets for their militant spring offensive to protest, spread propaganda and seduce new prey. In this election year, the Left has redoubled its efforts to mobilize anti-war protests as a way to help their Democratic comrades defeat incumbent President George W. Bush. This Saturday, March 20, anti-American marches and rallies were scheduled for dozens of cities in 50 countries around the world, and in the U.S. from Manhattan to Los Angeles. (In picking this date for antiwar protest, did they notice that the month of March was named for the Roman god of War?) Purportedly chosen to mark the one-year anniversary of America?s incursion into Iraq, March 20 this year also happens to be the Spring Equinox (one of two annual days when day and night are equal), the day when spring officially begins. Millions of pagans, as their forebears did at Stonehenge, go to parks to celebrate the Equinox as Mother Nature?s own ?Earth Day.? (The first unnatural Earth Day, April 22, 1970, was deliberately set for Soviet Union founder Vladimir Lenin?s 100th Birthday and has been gleefully celebrated as Earth Day by Marxists and their red-green fellow travelers on this mass murderer?s birthday ever since.) These pagan nature lovers, brought out by spring fever instead of feverish anti-Bush activism, will doubtless be used to falsely inflate media tallies of rallying Leftist protesters. Foremost among the groups planning and coordinating this March 20 hatefest is International A.N.S.W.E.R. (Act Now to Stop War & End Racism). Even hyper-Lefty economist Robert Kuttner, co-editor of The American Prospect, admits that this organization ?can be described fairly as Marxist.? To trace ANSWER?s ancestry, first came the Communist Party USA, puppet front group of the Soviet Union. From it schismed the Socialist Workers Party (SWP). But the SWP itself then split because hardcore members declared it not sufficiently loyal to the Soviet Union when Russian tanks crushed the 1956 uprising in the Soviet colony of occupied Hungary. These chauvinists for Soviet colonialism broke away from SWP and formed the Workers World Party (WWP), which embraced North Korea?s totalitarian dictator Kim Il Sung (and thereafter his son Kim Jong Il) as the Marxist messiah. International ANSWER is the chief front group, the mask used to disguise its real motives, concocted by the Workers World Party. Such details can be tedious, but they are where the devil hides. And these seasonal protests, like baseball, are more fun to watch when you know the rules, tactics, strategies and secret agendas behind the game. Recognizing International ANSWER?s puppet-masters behind the March 20 anti-war protests also helps us to understand why FBI Director Louis J. Freeh warned Congress that ?Anarchists and extreme socialist groups ? many of which, such as the Workers? World Party?have an international presence and, at times, also represent a potential threat in the United States.? Among these eye-opening details, consider what can be gleaned from ANSWER?s own published list of endorsers for its March 20, 2004, ?Global Day of Action.? Most of the listed organizations, we can assume from nearly a century of Communist Party front group activity, are little more than a handful of radicals who printed their own letterhead to create several noble-sounding organizations. But even so, look at what is scheduled to march Saturday under ANSWER?s red banner. More than any other cause, 22 nominally pro-Muslim and/or anti-Israel groups sit prominently near the top of this endorser list. These include the San Francisco group QUIT! (Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism), the Palestine Right to Return Coalition (Al Awda), the Palestinian Solidarity Committee and the Free Palestine Alliance. Every computer-downloadable flyer that ANSWER?s website offers to promote the March 20 protest in different cities includes some clear photo of Palestinian protest ? except, oddly, the flyer for Los Angeles. ANSWER also offers these flyers in Spanish to tell those in Washington, D.C. how to catch buses to the big march in New York City, where Leftists can also get flyers in Spanish. But, again oddly, in San Francisco, Sacramento and Los Angeles, ANSWER offers no downloadable flyers in Spanish but all are available in Arabic! One might logically infer that secret Muslim oil money provides a large share of ANSWER?s funding ? or, to paraphrase their rhetoric, that this anti-war campaign is being fought for oil bloodmoney. But even without money, ANSWER has become a dirt magnet for every sort of Israel-hating anti-Semitic kookery. Ultra-Leftist Rabbi Michael Lerner, editor of Tikkun magazine and onetime spiritual advisor to Senator Hillary Clinton, found this out when ANSWER banned him from speaking at its February 15, 2003, antiwar rally in San Francisco. Lerner was banned, ANSWER proclaimed, because it will not allow a ?pro-Israel? speaker on any stage it controls. (Rabbi Lerner is, in fact, a pseudo-Solomon who would split the land of Israel down the middle and give half to the Palestinians, thereby leaving the Jewish State in mortal peril ? but nothing short of Israel?s immediate extermination and another Shoah will satisfy the anti-Semitic Lefties of International ANSWER.) Other endorsers of this protest include Cuba Education Tours and No War on Cuba, Washington, D.C. The Communist Party USA?s Frederick Douglass Club is listed, as are two Irish socialist parties and the International Committee to Defend Slobodan Milosevic (Irish Section). [International ANSWER is among the world?s biggest supporters of Marxist mass murderer Milosevic.] And so the list of endorsers goes for page after page ? from the usual suspects, including organizations identified as Communist front groups since the 1950s to public employee unions, environmental organizations, groups supporting convicted cop-killer Mumia Abdul Jamal, Transgenders United for Equality (TRUE), and individual soulmates of the Democratic Party representing MoveOn.org and other extreme Leftist groups. Many of these groups and individuals are hard-core, anti-American, Leftist and radical. Others may be mesmerized and idealistic, the ?useful idiots? the Left has always used as fig leaves and cannon fodder. And all enjoy something in the United States they would be denied in the very Marxist countries they find so admirable ? constitutional rights to gather, march and speak freely. (To be fair, let?s remember the old joke: an American tourist boasts to a Soviet citizen that ?I have the right to say aloud ?I hate the President of the United States,?? and the Soviet replies ?I, too, have the same right to stand here in Red Square and say ?I hate the President of the United States!??) International ANSWER would dismiss these as bourgeois rights that will no longer be needed in Marxist utopia. Ah, but these American rights can be exploited as political weapons to help weaken the capitalist United States this weekend. One Leftist website promoting the March 20 ?Global Day of Action? showed the Left?s hidden cards, its use of manipulative tactics and techniques, in a guide for activists titled ?Using Media Effectively.? Its very title should warn reporters that Leftists are out to ?use? them, not merely to convey an honest story. In addition to some common-sense public relations hints and tips ? e.g., find sympathetic subjects, use costumes for visual interest, appeal to peoples? self-interest ? this Leftist media guide cynically advises activists: ?Attempt should be to give illusion of mass involvement to get media interested.? [Emphasis mine.] So the aim of these Leftists in ?using? the media is not truth but illusion, the creation of a false image that the Left is really bigger, wider, deeper, and more numerous and powerful than is actually true. It?s rather like Senator John F. Kerry (D-Mass.) pointing to his high victory percentage in primary wins, not the more relevant fact that voter turnout for Democratic primaries is much, much lower than in previous presidential elections because few voters actually like or want Mr. Kerry. On March 20 expect to see lots of banners claiming to represent important-sounding different groups in these marches ? but take time to notice how few actual marchers are carrying all those banners. (You might, as the old joke goes, also be able to hear the International ANSWER drill sergeant chanting: ?To the Left, Left, Left, and Left, Left?.?) ?Prevent media?s departure prior to achievement of an effective solution to the problem,? says the Leftist Using Media handbook. ?Try to equate media success with the social change you want, so that when you win, the media feels it is they who?ve won. Give them the credit, and make them see they are to be credited. This way you?ll make a media ally.? The Left?s great advantage is that most establishment journalists not only lean leftward themselves but also feel pressure from their peers to do likewise. Saturday?s activists will, as usual, be exploiting this to gain more favorable coverage. Reporters typically get into the business out of ego ? to see their byline in print or face on TV ? and then become jaded and cynical. This handbook cunningly teaches Leftists to stroke a reporter?s ego at the same time they appeal to his or her dormant idealism and desire to make a difference. ?A reporter?s agenda should be known in full right from the start,? advises the Leftist Using Media guide. ?When an unfamiliar reporter comes, ask what angle she/he is pursuing. Reporters refusing to divulge their purpose in seeking your comments may harm you more than help you. Examine the reporter?s prior coverage of similar issues. Strengthen your relationship with sympathetic reporters by giving them exclusive [sic].? The press is supposed to be the watchdog over our society, but Democratic politicians have for decades been able to turn reporters into lapdogs. The usual tactic, reflected in this guide, is the use of carrots and sticks. If a reporter writes an unfavorable story, an elected politician punishes him by giving his competitors more access and advance information than he gets, thereby making his rivals seem to be more on the ball than he is. If a reporter does favorable stories, the politician rewards him with scoops, exclusive tidbits and interviews, story ideas, and other favors that make the reporter look good in his boss?s eyes. These rewards and punishments usually produce a symbiotic relationship that benefits both politician and reporter ? even as it betrays the citizenry who depend on the press to be its watchdog. Only now, a decade after the ascendance of Republican House and Senate majorities in 1994, are Left-leaning reporters beginning to recognize that their beloved Democrats might not regain control of Congress for a long, long time?.and that friendships with the new majority must be forged. For most of these ten years, reporters continued to curry favor as if minority Democrats who shared their political views were still in charge?.or were on the verge of regaining power. This savvy Leftist Using Media guide proposes using just such carrots and sticks, protest after protest, to cultivate the kind of friendly reporters desired. Cooperative reporters are to be given help doing stories. Reporters who try to remain objective and do not cozy up to activists should get less cooperation. This may result in a bad story in the short run but will probably get the reporter pulled off the protest beat in the long run, making way for a more friendly and more pliable journalist. With the national media full of Leftist friends and Republican foes, how will the news cover Saturday?s events? ANSWER?s Marxist bedfellow organization United For Peace and Justice declared that ?over 250 U.S. events? are planned, along with ?protests in more than 50 countries? on March 20 to mark the one year anniversary of America?s liberation ? or as these Leftist groups call it, ?occupation? ? of Iraq. Last September 27-28, while Saddam Hussein?s army tanks still smoldered and U.S. troops and allied troops were mopping up pockets of resistance in Iraq, International ANSWER launched a similar fall offensive of anti-American propaganda and protest. It, too, was backed by sophisticated media and organization. It, too, was a worldwide event. Estimated total antiwar protester turnout around the entire planet ? a mere 35,000 to 45,000 marchers. Divide this turnout by 300 cities and separate events and you get somewhere between 117 and 150 antiwar protestors per city or event. Months earlier, before Saddam?s overthrow and before his torture chambers and mass graves with hundreds of thousands of victims began to be opened, a February 15 peace rally in London alone brought out 250,000 antiwar protestors. That?s five to seven times more protesters in one city in February than turned out worldwide seven months later, after the liberation of Iraq. Chances are that the antiwar fervor over Iraq has faded, the fever has broken, and the ?illusion? Leftists try so hard to conjure has lost much of its former power to deceive. But spring is again in the air, and with it an election year that could set Leftists marching not to end war but to defeat President Bush. In San Francisco the Longshoremen, once a Communist-dominated union, reportedly will stop unloading ships, hold a morning union meeting, and then board buses to join the day of protest. No big deal, says the Pacific Maritime Association. The union merely rescheduled its usual monthly work stoppage for Saturday, and shippers were notified well in advance to avoid problems. More than 2,000 protesters were arrested in San Francisco last year, but the city later dropped most charges. March 20, 2004, is expected to bring the usual street blockages, smashing of a few corporate windows, and nostalgic protests as for a few hours the 1960s return to town. The Bay Area baby boomers still take drugs ? but nowadays mostly Metamucil and Vioxx. In New York City it snowed this week, just as the groundhog warned. What if the protesters, following their own dull March Madness, see the shadows of their former selves, back when the Soviet Union was strong and one of every three humans lived under Marxism? That ?dream? is dead. As the great international economist Sir Peter Bauer said, by 2050 there will be only two True Believing Marxists left on the entire planet ? and they will be two nuns in Brazil. If these protesters see their shadows this Saturday, it will mean at least another four years before it?s springtime for Hitler or Marx ? or them. And now Bush is picking off the tyrants and terrorists one by one. If Osama bin Laden is caught or killed before November, Bush?s re-election seems almost certain, especially against a Democrat as two-faced and untrustworthy as Senator Kerry. The global war is ending, and capitalism has apparently won. As Marx himself knew, it would be a tough fight because the bourgeoisie are themselves a revolutionary class ? the class that overthrew the kings, ignited the mighty engine of productive free enterprise, and liberated the potential of individuals. Come what may, on March 21 the Hinckley Chamber of Commerce will host its annual Buzzard Sunday pancake breakfast at Hinckley Elementary School. Nobody will be eating crow or road kill ? except the big birds that have feasted on carrion there, about 20 miles south of Cleveland, every March since 1818.
 
Quote    Reply

NewGuy    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/20/2004 5:13:34 PM
Hey, GBWR - what's your point? That geography books are cheap?? That you can't debate Jim Dunnigans post on its merits or truthfullness so you bring up non-related issues as a diversion tactic??? Do it cause you great discomfort that Iraqis generally find themselves better off now that that Saddam is gone and the sanctions are removed???? Please, lets see you logically and rationally refute the poll results -- your completely unrelated claims of American media bias and lies are frankly inane, considering that the poll in question was done by IRAQIS, and was sponsored and directed by mostly NON-AMERICAN media institutions, like the BBC, German broadcasting network ARD, Japanese broadcasters NHK, and the independent British group Oxford Research International -- the only American media involved involved was ABC News, and ORI trained and directed the Iraqi pollsters themselves, not ABC. Are you capable of more than "cut-n-paste-and-run"? Let's see... NewGuy
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/20/2004 5:27:29 PM
You forgot Jonah Goldberg's Zetigeist Award Winning, "Cheese eating surrender monkeys" (which, as he's often pointed out, is actually a line from THE SIMPSONS). However, apart from providing a valuable reference to a number of useful articles, you're claim is in error. The various demonstrations, have, indeed, been covered in the American media. They were the leading story, tonight, in both NBC and ABC network news. (CBS preempted their news broadcast, this evening.) Stories appeared in the papers. NPR? But, of course. Perhaps your real complaint is that so many Americans care so little for the opinions of Europe, and so many agree, strongly, with the Bush policies?
 
Quote    Reply

Jay    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/21/2004 2:00:41 PM
I think the poll results actually might also be under-reporting the positive opinions of the Iraqis. Seeing as everyone under the age of 35 was born under the Ba'ath party's brutal brand of pan-arab fascism, I'm sure quite a few people are still very hesitant about talking how much better life will be without Saddam. In truth I think the numbers are probably closer to 70%, but the Sunnis will take a long time before coming around, still getting used to their cake ride coming to an end.
 
Quote    Reply

swami    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/21/2004 7:33:35 PM
I am really glad that this poll was commissioned. And I am not surprised that the Iraqis are generally happy with the way things are going, but that they are also suspicious of the US military. I think that it generally shows that we are on the right track, but much needs to be done. I hope we have the discipline to not cut out too quickly. As a pro-war Democrat, I am appalled by how many so-called progressives are violently opposed to overthrowing a dictator and trying to establish a democracy. I remember when the left stood for overthrowing tyranny. Anyway I am glad that polls like this give us the information to cut through all the ideological BS of both the left and the right.
 
Quote    Reply

Ehran    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/22/2004 4:02:27 PM
It's not so much that tossing saddam out was a bad thing. it's more the crock bush tried to sell the world to justify it. I mean do you think the american public would have fallen into line so fast and easy if the rationale had been "he's a lousy sob and it's time someone did something about him".
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/22/2004 4:25:30 PM
Ehran wrote: "he's a lousy sob and it's time someone did something about him" Actually, the US public probably would have supported that line of reasoning. The US public, as far as I can see, has wanted Saddam gone since 1991. The problem is that the wonderful media, opposition political party and european allies wouldn't have supported it. Now, as far as I'm concerned, if the US public at large supports it and we live in a democracy that's good enough. However, Colin Powell, among others, convinced Bush that he needed international support to the greatest extent possible, which is why we played out the charade at the UN. In fact there was ample UN authority for what Bush did and no need for any of the gyrations that he went through prior to the action taken. I think that what Bush and his govt are guilty of is primarily believing that they had to try and appear to be multi-lateral. They should have simply used the prior UN resolutions as authority and taken action. The US public would have supported it and the French, Germans and Russians, who have lost a great deal of money with the overthrow of Saddam, would not have.
 
Quote    Reply

Jay    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/23/2004 9:02:15 AM
'It's not so much that tossing saddam out was a bad thing. it's more the crock bush tried to sell the world to justify it. I mean do you think the american public would have fallen into line so fast and easy if the rationale had been "he's a lousy sob and it's time someone did something about him" ' Actually, I'm not so sure it was a crock. The opponents of this war have used the Orwellian technique of "say it, say, say it enough and they'll believe it" to the point where many have seemed to forget we still don't know if those weapons were moved to Syria. They certainly had time. In any case there's no doubt that the Iraqis were busy hiding something in the months leading up to the war. I tend to think that he did have some WMD, maybe not as many as was thought, but still a substantial amount. And there's no doubt in my mind that it was only a matter of time before that lunatic got his hands on an ex-Sov or Pakistani nuke. But really, I do think the main reason Americans did support the war was because Saddam was such an sob. We Americans more than most people tend to think of things in terms of heroes and villians, it's part of our culture. Bush just couldn't say that, because then the inevitable question would arise as to why don't we get rid of all the other sob's too. Kind of like why jump in and save one drowning person when you can't save them all. I do think Bush honestly believed, with good reason, that Iraq had WMD. But I also think that a lot of the reason for this war was a final realization that the arab world was only going to continue to deteriorate into further violence. It would continue producing more terrorists and eventually descend into a large regional war which would suck in many other countries, including the US. Unless we got a significant foothold in the area and jumpstarted a real democracy. Saddam made Iraq the best place to get that foothold. But could Bush have "sold" the war that way? I don't know. But I still support everything he did. I think this invasion will prevent an exponentially worse war five or ten years in the future. One that my kids would have had to fight. So I guess in a nutshell my feeling is that WMD was a reason for the war, though not the only one. But it certainly wasn't for oil. Just my two cents :-).
 
Quote    Reply

American Kafir    RE:About those war protests...   3/26/2004 7:42:39 PM
>>Hi American Kefir, I am really sorry, but if you declare that anti-American marches and rallies were scheduled in the U.S. from Manhattan to Los Angeles I think you really have a problem. If those approximately 50% of democrats and Nader voters are all anti-American, I just wonder, how do you define America?<< By that logic, would the 199,950,000 of 2 million registered voters in America who didn't attend anti-war protests give you a clue as to how I define America? Or maybe the American flags flying on every other car on the highway? >>Why don't you just join the "freerepublic.com" and socialize with the friends of lies, propaganda and ignorance<< Because you were easier to find here?
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    What happened? Is there a full moon out tonight?   3/26/2004 7:51:41 PM
Looks like the Stars Might be Right - and the return of Grolth is Imminent. Seems in his litany of all the faults of the United States, our newist Bush admin basher forgot to mention the ALLIANCE OF CONVENIENCE with one of the biggest butchers of the last century- Josip Stalin and the Soviet Union- an alliance forged for the express purpose of defeating a greater perceived evil of the time - Adolph Hitler. You wouldnt happen to be German, would you - so convenient of you to forget this one. Are you suggesting that the Alliance with the Soviet Union- although a slight human rights abuser in its own right - was not the correct approach taken to defeat the German menace fueled by the hatred promulgated by Hitler? ALLIANCES OF CONVENIENCE are a standard operating procedure in the conduct of foreign policy -- has been for decades. I guess that bothers you, but then, it is obvious from the few postings that you have made that your agenda is NOT to discuss foreign policy, but to bash the Bush administration. So what is your point? swhitebull
 
Quote    Reply

American Kafir    RE:Shocking Results of Iraqi Public Opinion Poll   3/26/2004 8:10:39 PM
"if the US public at large supports it and we live in a democracy that's good enough." >>Wow, great, I will call my president, for sure the large part of the public in my country would support overthrowing George W. Bush. As would the people in Brazil, Spain, France, Switzerland, just to name a few. You preach the law of the jungle, are you a monkey<< No, silly. We're evil conspirators hell-bent on ruling the world. Here's how we'd deal with your "coalition": Brazil - we stop drinking coffee. Brazilian economy wrecked. Spain - we bomb a mailbox, send a tape claiming Osama Bin Laden wants them to wear socks on their ears. Spanish troops refuse to march barefoot. France - CIA secretly inserts laxatives in dog food supply. Paris drowns in bureaucratic response. Switzerland - Hundreds of normally neutral Swiss soldiers run from their homes to blow up bridges, cut phone lines, block roads, and head for the mountains in anticipation of an American invasion that never comes. Years later, Alpine expeditions find piles of open food cans, empty wine bottles, lots of Erector set toys and screws lying around, and evidence of campfires, surrounded by frozen, starved corpses with well-groomed hair and watches showing the precise time.
 
Quote    Reply

American Kafir    RE:What happened? Is there a full moon out tonight?   3/26/2004 8:19:31 PM
Full moon might be right. It is, after all, FREAKY FRIDAY! Salaam alizzle, my nizzle.
 
Quote    Reply

American Kafir    RE:About those war protests...   3/26/2004 8:25:42 PM
>>Sure, everyone who has a flag on the car supports the Iraq war and will vote for Bush, and everyone who did not show up on the street still thinks that Hussein was the real Bin Laden and has WMD under his footnails. Dream on<< I'm not sure how I'll vote. The promise of candy chews falling down from rainbows in the sky if I vote for Kerry is awful tempting.
 
Quote    Reply

swhitebull    RE:What happened? Is there a full moon out tonight?   3/26/2004 8:28:13 PM
..I never heard that the US and the Soviets worked very well together, I only heard about the race they had in Germany to get bigger chunks of the interesting parts of the country. But maybe you know more than I do.. Actually, it appears I do, as do most of the people here who remember their history. I sugget you pick up a non-German version of the US contribution to the US war effort- or pick up Strategy7 Tactics magazine #23, which discussed this in detail. The US contribution to the Soviet Union in terms of DIRECT military and indirect industrial aid enabled the Soviets to increase their logistical tail, motorize the bulk of their infantry in the latter stages of the war thru Lend-Lease trucks, and provide the edge that the Soviets needed to beat the Germans and KEEP on beating them. The Teheran agreement between Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin in late 1943 laid the groundwork for cooperation between the three countries, and strategicall planned the conduct of the rest of the war. Here's an outline of just how paltry an aid effort we gave to a human-rights violating, repressive, horrible regime, whom we joined in an ALLIANCE OF CONVENIENCE to beat the Nazis: Despite deep-seated mistrust and hostility between the Soviet Union and the Western democracies, Nazi Germany's invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941 created an instant alliance between the Soviets and the two greatest powers in what the Soviet leaders had long called the "imperialist camp": Britain and the United States. Three months after the invasion, the United States extended assistance to the Soviet Union through its Lend-Lease Act of March 1941. Before September 1941, trade between the United States and the Soviet Union had been conducted primarily through the Soviet Buying Commission in the United States. Lend-Lease was the most visible sign of wartime cooperation between the United States and the Soviet Union. About $11 billion in war material was sent to the Soviet Union under that program. Additional assistance came from U.S. Russian War Relief (a private, nonprofit organization) and the Red Cross. About seventy percent of the aid reached the Soviet Union via the Persian Gulf through Iran; the remainder went across the Pacific to Vladivostok and across the North Atlantic to Murmansk. Lend- Lease to the Soviet Union officially ended in September 1945. Joseph Stalin never revealed to his own people the full contributions of Lend-Lease to their country's survival, but he referred to the program at the 1945 Yalta Conference saying, "Lend-Lease is one of Franklin Roosevelt's most remarkable and vital achievements in the formation of the anti-Hitler alliance." Lend-Lease material was welcomed by the Soviet Union, and President Roosevelt attached the highest priority to using it to keep the Soviet Union in the war against Germany. Nevertheless, the program did not prevent friction from developing between the Soviet Union and the other members of the anti-Hitler alliance. The Soviet Union was annoyed at what seemed to it to be a long delay by the allies in opening a "second front" of the Allied offensive against Germany. As the war in the east turned in favor of the Soviet Union, and despite the successful Allied landings in Normandy in 1944, the earlier friction intensified over irreconcilable differences about postwar aims within the anti-Axis coalition. Lend-Lease helped the Soviet Union push the Germans out of its territory and Eastern Europe, thus accelerating the end of the war. With Stalin's takeover of Eastern Europe, the wartime alliance ended, and the Cold War began. swhitebull - times change, conditions dont. The Bush Doctrine says that different conditions require different mixes of allies. Iraq was no different, as was the Alliance with the Soviets in WW2, or with Ho Chi Minh of Vietnam also during WW2. A suggestion - study Politics Among Nations - by Hans Morgenthau - it is one of the CLASSIC books on international politics. It's all there.
 
Quote    Reply

bsl    RE:What happened? Is there a full moon out tonight?   3/26/2004 8:42:31 PM
"But maybe you know more than I do" Set the bar higher. And, it was the US, USSR, and UK. My, my. A mere half century since the greatest war in human history and already a staggering level of ignorance....
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy