PDA

View Full Version : Only 29% of Americans Say U.S. Is Winning WOT



3077India
07-04-07, 08:17 PM
Only 29% of Americans Say U.S. Is Winning War on Terrorism (http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27955) <--(Click for source location)


Lowest percentage recorded to date

by Joseph Carroll

PRINCETON, NJ -- The latest Gallup Poll finds fewer than 3 in 10 Americans saying the United States is winning the war on terrorism, the lowest percentage holding this view since the 9/11 terrorist attacks. But, Americans do not believe the terrorists are winning the war, either; rather, half the public indicate that neither side is winning. Most Americans consider the war in Afghanistan to be part of the war on terrorism, but more than half reject the notion that the war in Iraq is. The public's concerns about being a victim of terrorism have been quite steady over the past two years, and views that there terrorist attacks in the country are imminent are at their lowest point in two years.


Winning the War on Terrorism

The June 11-14, 2007, poll updated Gallup's trend question that asks Americans if the United States and its allies, the terrorists, or neither side is "currently winning the war against terrorism."

The results show that 29% of Americans say the United States is winning, while 20% say the terrorists are winning and 50% say neither side. Americans are the most pessimistic about the U.S. efforts in the global war on terror now than at any other point since Gallup first asked this question in October 2001, with the 29% saying the United States is winning a new low and the 20% who say the terrorists are winning nearing the previous high. This is also the first time that half of Americans see the war as a stalemate.

http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr070622i.gif


Americans were most optimistic about the country's progress in the war on terrorism shortly after the United States took military action against the Taliban government in Afghanistan, with a high of 66% of Americans who thought the United States was winning in January 2002. Americans' assessments about the country's terrorism efforts grew more negative as the White House pressed its case for an invasion of Iraq in 2002 and early 2003. Opinions shifted in a more positive direction about a month after the United States invaded Iraq and toppled Saddam Hussein's regime. But as the Iraq war has dragged on, the public's pessimism has grown and the percentage saying the United States is winning has been gradually declining.

Military Actions in Afghanistan, Iraq Part of the War on Terrorism?

The poll also asked Americans if they consider the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq to be "part of the war on terrorism," or an "entirely separate military action." Nearly two in three Americans (65%) consider the war in Afghanistan to be part of the war on terrorism, while 32% consider it a separate action. Americans are much less likely to consider the war in Iraq to be part of the war on terrorism -- only 43% agree that it is, while a majority, 53%, says it is a separate military action.
http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr070622ii.gif
The majority view in the pre-war and early war stages reflected the Bush administration's position that military action in Iraq was another piece of the war on terrorism. At least half of Americans said they consider the war in Iraq to be part of the war on terrorism from September 2002 through October 2004. In June 2005, for the first time, Gallup found the public disagreeing with the administration's position, and continuing to do so throughout 2005 and early 2006. Then, in the fall of 2006, shortly after the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, Americans' views on the Iraq war were once again divided. But that shift proved to be temporary given the latest results.


Part 2 follows.

3077India
07-04-07, 08:18 PM
Terrorism Worries

There has been little change in the public's concerns about being a victim of terrorism in the past two years, and public expectations that there will be terrorist attacks against the United States in the coming weeks are lower now than at any other point over the past two years.

Forty-four percent of Americans say they are "very" (12%) or "somewhat" (32%) worried that they or someone in their family will become a victim of terrorism. The level of worry has fluctuated between 41% and 47% over the past two years. From a longer-term perspective, public concerns about terrorism were highest in the weeks after the 9/11 attacks, when concern levels reached as high as 59%.

http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr070622iii.gif
When asked about the likelihood of a terrorist attack happening in the United States in the next few weeks, 40% of Americans say this is "very" (9%) or "somewhat" (31%) likely to occur. These perceptions are much lower now than they were last August, when half of Americans said an attack was likely. In fact, this is the lowest percentage saying attacks were likely since June 2005, when 35% did, which is the lowest percentage measured to date. At its highpoint, about a month after 9/11 and during the anthrax incidents, 85% of Americans said another terrorist attack was likely to happen.
http://media.gallup.com/POLL/Releases/pr070622iv.gif

Partisan Views of Terrorism

Republicans and Democrats differ in their overall views of who is winning the war on terrorism, if the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are part of the war on terrorism, and their overall concerns about terrorism. The two party groups do not differ in their views about the likelihood of an attack happening in the United States in the coming weeks, with roughly 4 in 10 Republicans and Democrats saying it is at least somewhat likely.
Fifty-three percent of Republicans say the United States is winning the war on terrorism, much higher than the 26% among independents and 12% among Democrats.
A majority of Republicans, independents, and Democrats say the war in Afghanistan is part of the war on terrorism, but Republicans (81%) are much more likely than independents (58%) or Democrats (59%) to hold this point of view.
Partisans are divided most on whether the war in Iraq is part of the war on terrorism. Nearly three in four Republicans (73%) say it is, compared with 29% of Democrats. Sixty-six percent of Democrats consider the war to be a separate military action. Independents' responses are similar to those of Democrats.
Republicans (53%) are also more likely than Democrats (43%) or independents (39%) to say they are very or somewhat worried about becoming a victim of terrorism.Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with 1,007 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted June 11-14, 2007. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the margin of sampling error is 3 percentage points. In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

jetdawgg
07-05-07, 08:45 AM
Great post here. This shows that I am correct in my views here along with almost 61% of the Marines who fed the poll:usmc:

drumcorpssnare
07-05-07, 02:04 PM
3077India- If you were engaged in a boxing/wrestling match with someone, and you were having a good amount of success, in spite of hecklers on the sideline kicking and punching you....and your local media reported that you were getting your butt stomped, in the worst way...
then it's likely that the people in your city would respond to a similar poll, that 29% thought you were winning your fight.
Oh, and remember...the rules of engagement. You have to fight with your hands tied behind your back.
Ya know, kinda like Iraq.
drumcorpssnare:usmc:

jetdawgg
07-05-07, 02:16 PM
3077India- If you were engaged in a boxing/wrestling match with someone, and you were having a good amount of success, in spite of hecklers on the sideline kicking and punching you....and your local media reported that you were getting your butt stomped, in the worst way...
then it's likely that the people in your city would respond to a similar poll, that 29% thought you were winning your fight.
Oh, and remember...the rules of engagement. You have to fight with your hands tied behind your back.
Ya know, kinda like Iraq.
drumcorpssnare:usmc:

If we are having so much success why is it now (success) nearly 5 years old?

What current republican administration has the troops out there with their hands tied behind their back? One guess please.....

drumcorpssnare
07-05-07, 02:40 PM
Jetdawgg- Name me one war that was won, virtually overnight.
You must be among the number who sees the nightly news reports relating to Baghdad, and just assumes the entire country of Iraq is experiencing the same total chaos. Those of us who are interested in the "whole truth", know that the vast majority of Iraq is relatively peaceful, especially the Kurdish north. But, you're not interested in any success stories. You just want the U.S. out of Iraq, now. Which means you have no concept of what will fill that vacuum, once we're gone.
I honestly believe, that if you went to Iraq, and saw good, positive things happening over there, you wouldn't believe it. You'd come back on this forum and tell us it was all a trick, done with smoke and mirrors.

drumcorpssnare:usmc:

jetdawgg
07-05-07, 02:48 PM
Jetdawgg- Name me one war that was won, virtually overnight.
You must be among the number who sees the nightly news reports relating to Baghdad, and just assumes the entire country of Iraq is experiencing the same total chaos. Those of us who are interested in the "whole truth", know that the vast majority of Iraq is relatively peaceful, especially the Kurdish north. But, you're not interested in any success stories. You just want the U.S. out of Iraq, now. Which means you have no concept of what will fill that vacuum, once we're gone.
I honestly believe, that if you went to Iraq, and saw good, positive things happening over there, you wouldn't believe it. You'd come back on this forum and tell us it was all a trick, done with smoke and mirrors.

drumcorpssnare:usmc:

drums I just posted last week that the Turks are ready to invade the 'peaceful Kurdish North'.

When we leave Iraq, they will have their war over the land (civil). Whomever wins, I think that the US is quite capable of dealing with them.

3077India
07-05-07, 03:13 PM
3077India- If you were engaged in a boxing/wrestling match with someone, and you were having a good amount of success, in spite of hecklers on the sideline kicking and punching you....and your local media reported that you were getting your butt stomped, in the worst way...
then it's likely that the people in your city would respond to a similar poll, that 29% thought you were winning your fight.
Oh, and remember...the rules of engagement. You have to fight with your hands tied behind your back.
Ya know, kinda like Iraq.
drumcorpssnare:usmc:I'm pretty sure I didn't state any where that I agreed with the poll, I merely posted it. Gallup generally acquires its poll results by polling mostly from the 6 largest and most liberal-minded cities, so consider the source. Although I do think the poll contains some interesting information with regard to people's perceptions of the WOT.

Sgt Leprechaun
07-05-07, 09:21 PM
It IS an interesting poll.

And, Jet, you are now saying 'our hands are tied behind our back'????

Really? Are you advocating "Total War"????

You think that we are capable of 'dealing with' whomever wins the Civil war, huh? Yeah, I suppose so. After the bloodbath, with millions dead, sure. Sorry, I don't like that scenario.

jetdawgg
07-06-07, 10:26 AM
I never said that our 'hands were not tied'. This reopublican admin in charge sets the agenda. <br />
<br />
If you use the Marines, you are at war. <br />
<br />
So you like the scenario of 'stay the course'? How's...

jetdawgg
07-06-07, 10:26 AM
I never said that our 'hands were not tied'. This reopublican admin in charge sets the agenda. <br />
<br />
If you use the Marines, you are at war. <br />
<br />
So you like the scenario of 'stay the course'? How's...

Sgt Leprechaun
07-07-07, 05:41 PM
Actually, since the final troops for the surge (which isn't 'Stay the course') have only just arrived, I think the question should be "Let's ask General Petreaus and the commanders ON THE GROUND" 'How it's working out' before we decide it's a failure.

213
07-07-07, 06:18 PM
If we are having so much success why is it now (success) nearly 5 years old?

I'm by no means an expert on the subject, merely a student of it, but from what I understand, insurgencies are extremely complicated affairs that can take decades and multiple generations to fight and win.

From what I've read(mainly from the more recent books of H. John Poole, as well as articles by William S. Lind - both of whom are Retired Marines)part of the reason we are having trouble in dealing with this insurgency(much like in Vietnam)is that our military is still fighting with 1st-2nd Generation Warfare tactics/strategy(where as the Germans pioneered 3rd Gen. Warfare in 1918). Which more or less means, if I understand it correctly, that we rely too much on our superior firepower, and that our rigid structure prevents our smaller unit elements(fireteam-platoon)from excercising enough initiative in engaging said insurgents. From what I've heard, however, the U.S. Marine Corps has been leading the way in adopting a 3rd-4th Gen. Warfare Doctrine, but even that(as with all major organizational changes)will take time. The U.S. Army has also been breaking groundway with the Asymetrical Warfare Group.

There are many other subjects touched on that give insight as to why our military is facing other problems regarding the insurgency, I simply haven't read enough to describe them proficiently. For a more accurate description, I suggest reading H. John Poole's "The Tiger's Way- A U.S. Private's Best Chance for Survival", "Militant Tricks", and "Tactics of the Cresent Moon", as well as any of William S. Lind's articles(found on www.sftt.org (http://www.sftt.org))

Additional Disclaimer - I am by no means an expert on the subject, so if I am wrong in my interperetations, please correct me.

Sgt Leprechaun
07-07-07, 06:56 PM
213, I believe you to be correct. Thomas Ricks, in his book "Fiasco", comes to exactly the same conclusions. The Army is fighting the war they WANT, rather than the war they HAVE. The references you cite are all good ones and well worth anyone reading.