Quickie
June 24th, 2003 - 3:52 pm
Interesting polling data from CalPundit Kevin Drum:
44% think American casualties have been unacceptable, up from 28% a couple of months ago.
72% are concerned that we will get “bogged down in a long and costly peacekeeping mission.”
Kevin adds:
Taken together, these two things don’t bode well for our willingness to stick it out in Iraq. We seem willing to support war in the abstract, but rather less willing to support the necessary followup. That’s a bad combination.
In, as they say, deed.
Kevin Drum of all people should not be surprised. The President did NOTHING to prepare this country for the follow-on commitment. He can’t even remember to put Afghanistan in the budget for crying out loud.
Don’t you think the constant drum beat in the media affects how people think? If it didn’t, there would be no advertising. Constant repetition sinks into people’s minds even if they don’t realize it.
I think it’s a generational thing, Granmere.
My dad, who was a child during WWII, is not surprised at all. He remembers. Fully expects years and deaths.
You know… I think it’s wording. Of course American deaths are unacceptable. And the further we get from the “major conflict” the more the poll data will swing that way. The original question tried to ask it even handedly, but I’d say a more instructive question would have been: “Given the present level of American deaths in this conflict, would you support going to war with Iraq if we could make the decision all over again?”
I’m not that worried about this. Like “skorp” says, the wording matters. Everyone should be “concerned” that we get “bogged down in a long and costly peacekeeping mission.” This doesn’t say anything about whether or not people think we should be doing it.
A far better question would be, is it worth doing knowing that it will take years and cost lives?
So the poll says that the causalities in Iraq are “unacceptable” but yet the same poll wants us to go into Iran and has Bush at 68 percent job approval rating now one of these things does not mesh. Seeing as this is an ABC/Wash Post poll lets all try to guess which is wrong
Questions from the actual survey:
4. Again thinking about the goals versus the costs of the war, so far in your opinion has there been an acceptable or unacceptable number of U.S. military casualties in Iraq?
5. How do you feel about the possibility that the United States will get bogged down in a long and costly peacekeeping mission in Iraq – would you say you’re very concerned about that, somewhat concerned, not too concerned or not concerned at all?
Gee, these questions weren’t at all slanted to make the respondents sound like pacifists, were they?
Might as well have asked, Do you think U.S. casualties in the war are a good thing or a bad thing? or Would you support turning this war into a Vietnam-type quagmire in which thousands of our troops die as the war stretches on for years?
How else are people supposed to answer questions like that?!
Poor liberals they try and try