Poll: Zarqawi Death Has Little Impact

www.cbsnews.com... ml

AS A RESULT OF KILLING ZARQAWI, THE FOLLOWING THREATS WILL:

Attacks on U.S. Troops
Increase
30%
Decrease
16%
Same
50%

Terrorist Threat to U.S.
Increase
22%
Decrease
13%
Same
61%

Fifty-five percent of Americans still say the war in Iraq is going badly for the United States, while an overwhelming majority, 82 percent, describe the situation in Iraq as a civil war between Iraqis.

Still, the poll did find some signs that Americans are becoming more optimistic about Iraq — at least when looking at the long term. Sixty percent now say it's somewhat likely or very likely that the United States will ultimately find success in Iraq, a 5-point jump since last month.

There it is. Minds havent been changed. Like i've said, there has to be more, much more, before anything can really turn the tide.

Yeah, I had included that in my thread on the new Al-Qaeda boss in Iraq. Strange isn't it? They can't even kill of their boogeymen and make it better anymore. If they wanted to do something right, they would capture OBL, but of course, what would they do if they lost their Emmanuel Goldstein?

I have been watching the polls also, the numbers will remain the same due to the fact that it has to do more with the performance of the war on terror, the domestic problems with the gas and the economy than killing bad man number two.

Perhaps if the government stands up and say that our soldiers will come home in a week from the middle east today . . . then perhaps. . . minds will change.

posted by dgtempe

ON KILLING ZARQAWI

Attacks on U.S. Troops
Increase 30%
Decrease 16%
Stay the Same 50%

Terrorist Threat to U.S.
Increase 22%
Decrease 13%
Stay the Same 61%

55% of Americans say the Iraq war is going badly for the United States. A large majority, 82%, describe the situation in Iraq as a civil war. The poll did find signs that Americans are becoming more optimistic about Iraq in at least the long term. 60% say it's somewhat likely or very likely that the United States will ultimately find success in Iraq, a 5-point jump since last month. [Edited by Don W]

There it is. Minds haven’t been changed. There has to be much more before anything can really turn the tide. [Edited by Don W]

I think the American public is very perceptive. The two important numbers on “attacks” and “threats” are “stay the same.” 50% and 61%, respectively. We are witness to how 'falling off the screen' on Osama’s part has had little or no significant impact on the Iraq War. More evidence if any more was needed, that Iraq and al Qaeda were not connected then nor are they connected now.

I believe we killed most of OBL's operatives in Afghan in 2002. Daisy cutters. OBL is now hard at work trying to re-organize and re-invigorate his always smallish group. (That is why we can’t catch him). I expect unabashed dedication to the J’ihadist cause has diminished a lot since Afghan. The resurgence of the Taliban in Afghan is not due to al Qaeda but to local conditions. That’s for another post, however.

In what I’ve previously described as a publicity coup worthy of Madison Avenue, Zarqawi re-named his smallish outfit of radical terrorists “al Qaeda in Iraq.” A 4 word name. The lazy press has dutifully recited that name without explanation every time Zarqawi was referred to, making it sound as if Zarqawi was the deputy or lieutenant of Osama bin Laden posted to Iraq.

In fact, Zarqawi and bin Laden are not co-harts. Bin Laden holds to the earlier J’ihadist viewpoint of taking the “war” to the “far enemy” while Zarqawi advocated taking the “war” to the “near enemy ” as he did in Jordan and was doing in Iraq by killing fellow Muslims. Which tactic bin Laden does not embrace. OBL ‘consents’ to Zarqawi's misnomer because it has confused Americans and he can’t go to court for a trade mark infringement injunction.

While it can be argued I'm making a distinction without a difference, I think it is important to keep abreast of what is happening in this war, bit by bit, for by not knowing, we become the easy victims of propaganda from either or both sides. Of which there are loads every day.



[edit on 6/13/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by marg6043
the numbers will remain the same due to the fact that it has to do more with the performance of the war on terror, the domestic problems with the gas and the economy than killing bad man number two.

Right there! You said why the REAL positive impact of killing the number two
bad guy in Iraq won't be acknowledged by many in the America (and the world).

You basically said the people of America are to prejudiced and/or bigoted about
other issues to be able to see what REAL impact killing the number two guy
has/will accomplish. They can't seperate their hate for the republican
administration from the facts.

- a very bad guy is dead. When a terrorist is killed, it's a very good thing.
- he won't be able to mastermind any more mass killings in Jordan.
- he won't be able to mastermind any more mass killings in Iraq.
- he won't be able to mastermind or coordinate attacks against our troops.
- he won't be able to inspire anyone to join the terrorists.
- his death, and the deaths of his highest aids that died in the blast,
has put a hole in the terrorist network in Iraq.

Yes, others will step in the do his job. But will they be up to his evil standard?
Probably not. So IF someone fills his position - IF -then most likely they won't
be as wiley or as evil.

His death won't inspire others to join. His death means that he won't be
alive to inspire. I read last week where a few of the Canadian terror
'suspects' said that they joined the terrorist network because they were
inspired by HIM. Now this inspiration is gone.

Also, don't forget, these polls mean nothing. Polls can be skewed anyway
that the poll taker wants. Also, these polls also don't take into account what
the people know or don't know about the situation. How many of them actually
watch what is going on and know who the guy was? How many understand the
psychology of these terrorists? How many understand what the terrorist was
responsible for and how removing him also removes a great threat and
inspiration?

Polls are mostly useless. I say this when the are against the republican
administration and when they are against the democrats. Very few times
can poll numbers be trusted. Obviously, if some people are saying that
his death means nothing, then these polls are of people who don't want to
see the truth of the situation, or these polls are of people who don't understand
the situation.





[edit on 6/14/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by dgtempe
Minds havent been changed.

What some people think, and what the truth of the situation is,
aren't necessarily the same thing. Just because some people
think something ... doesn't make it true.

there has to be more, much more, before anything can really turn the tide.

His death is one (major) building block.
Every journey has to start with the first step.
Babies have to crawl before they can walk.

See where I'm going with this?
Each and every terrorist that is killed is turning the tide
... one by one as they die .... step by step.

Flyersfan,

You make perfect sense. I guess first you have to believe he was real. I'm tempted to think he was, but not 100% sure. Therein lies my problem.
Is anything real anymore?

posted by FlyersFan

Right! You said the REAL impact of killing the number two bad guy in Iraq won't be acknowledged by many in the America . . to be able to see what REAL impact killing the number two guy will accomplish . . “ [Edited by Don W]

See my prior post, F/F: “I’ve previously described a publicity coup worthy . . Zarqawi re-named his terrorists outfit “al Qaeda in Iraq.” A 4 word name. The lazy press has recited that name without explanation every time Zarqawi was referred to, making it sound as if Zarqawi was the deputy or lieutenant of Osama bin Laden posted to Iraq. Not so.”

“ . . his death, and his highest aides died in the blast, put a hole in the terrorist network in Iraq . . IF someone fills his position most likely they not be up to his evil standard . . they won't be as wiley or as evil . . his inspiration is gone.

How many [polled people] watch what is going on . . know who the guy was . . understand the psychology of terrorists . . polls are mostly useless . . if some people say his death means nothing, then the polls are of people who don't want to see the truth of the situation, or the polls are of people who don't understand the situation. [Edited by Don W]

I don’t know, F/F. The art of polling is now a science. It is pretty easy today to get an accurate poll of the public's opinion on most any conceivable topic. People who buy polls would soon stop using them if they proved unreliable. I’m not able to agree with your dour view of polling or pollsters.

I’ve explained how and why the misnomer, “al Qaeda in Iraq” came into existence and why is it misleading. Zarqawi was not Osama bin Laden’s lieutenant. Zarqawi was Numero Uno in his own group. But Numero Zero in OBL’s al Qaeda. Which does not change what you say about him no longer being an inspiration. On that there can be no doubt.


[edit on 6/14/2006 by donwhite]

Originally posted by dgtempe
Is anything real anymore?

No.

I'd leave it at that, but then the mods would jump on me and
fine me 5 points (or whatever) for not giving a 'more full'
two line or better answer ... so I'm filling.

Originally posted by donwhite
Zarqawi re-named his terrorists outfit “al Qaeda in Iraq.”

For the sake of this discussion we will go with your definition of
what he was. Okay? Let's just say he wasn't part of UBLs Al Qaeda.
I think he was at one point, and then broke off. But whatever. We
will go along with your thought on this.

Even with all the discussion about name change ...

The facts still remain... He was the leader of a terrorist organization
that mass murdered people in Jordan. He inspired many idiots to become
terrorists, including a few from the Canadian bunch that were caught
last week. He terrorized and wanted to mass murder Iraqis who were
voting in their first free elections in 30 or 40 years. He is responsible
for organizing and having carried out the bombings in Iraq which have
killed and killed and killed innocent people, including school children.

Killing him and his 7 aides put an end to his being able to inspire whacks
to join his group. He can no longer mastermind or control bombings
and international murder sprees. His ties and contacts are gone.

It is pretty easy today to get an accurate poll of the public's
opinion on most any conceivable topic.

Sure. An accurate poll could be achieved. But has it been?
Considering all the agenda - both for the right and left - that
we are being subjected to in media ... how can we know if this
is an accurate poll of the public's opinion?

Even if this is an accurate poll of OPINION ... it doesn't mean that
it's an accurate poll of the facts - the facts that this monster being
dead is a good thing in the war on terror and that his being dead
is definately another giant step towards the Iraqis gaining control
over their own country so we can get the heck out. For every journey
steps are required, and this is one more step on the journey towards
a stable Iraq and us not having to be there. Each and every death of
these terrorist monsters DOES have impact. Each one. Those who
were polled are flat out wrong.

I’m not able to agree with your dour view of polling or pollsters.

Okay. Fine. You are entitled. However, I absolutely do not believe
that polls are accurate. AND even if a poll is accurate it doesn't mean
that those polled even understand what the facts are to base their
opinion on.

Frankly - most everyone I know would know the name UBL, but wouldn't
have heard of, or cared about, Zarqawi. Most folks I know are sleepwalking
through life - physically and spiritually. If it isn't something for their
immediate gratification they just don't care.

Perhaps I need to hang around with different people?????
But that's what I see. Sleepwalkers.



[edit on 6/14/2006 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by FlyersFan

You basically said the people of America are to prejudiced and/or bigoted about
other issues to be able to see what REAL impact killing the number two guy
has/will accomplish.

The people in America or at least most of the people have very short term memories when it comes with issues that affect everyday lives and more so with issues that are in foreign lands.

The only hate I have is for the way in which our country was mislead into a conflict with a nation that had done nothing to us.

What we have given them is chaos and unwanted war, mayhem, death and now a battleground of insurgency.

If you consider that the grounds to be happy and satisfied with the so call Bush war on terror and taking man number two that was not killing anybody in Iraq prior to invasion . . . then your accounts of facts and time line of what is going on in Iraq is completely out of sequence.

Is easier to blame hate to facts than actually sit down and take the time to think about what is going on.

I hate what has been done to our nation in the name of politics and hypocrisy.

Well ... looks like those polled were dead wrong.

The death of Zarqawi has definately had a favorable impact on
the war against terror. Information gathered from the death site,
has lead to a flood of information and hundreds of terrorist arrests
throughout the area.

www.voanews.com...
www.msnbc.msn.com...
www.pajamasmedia.com...
www.mcculloughsite.net...://www.thebostonchannel.com/news/9338938/detail.html

The world definately is better off with him dead. AND major
steps have been taken against the insurgents and terrorists
because this man is dead and his secrets have been laid bare.
His death has definately had a great impact!