Republicans & Conservatives: Archives

Dustin you have put a very positive spin on the facts and I am not saying it is not justified. But the facts you present also show 44% of the military polled do NOT approve of Bush’s handling of the war.

Your numbers indicate 35% indicate the situation in Iraq was not worth going to war over. And 1/3 of military troops DO NOT approve of the President’s job performance.

Now as we all know who have served, there is no democracy in the military. And freedom of speech is reserved for off-base or off-duty. I am not sure if things have changed, but, when I was in the Army, it was understood by all that there were consequences for criticizing the chain of command or the Commander In Chief. It was drilled into us not to question the chain of command. Now I was enlisted, not sure if that made any difference. But promotions, (meaning pay level) and duty assignments depended upon having the right attitude and rote memorizing what you were told to think, and spitting it back sharply when asked.

Without seeing the notes on how the survey was conducted, there is a lot of room to speculate the survey was not valid or reliable statistically speaking for a host of reasons having to do with your life depending upon the person in front and behind you. Political discussion and debate among military personnel has a lot of consequences not the least of which is a riff with your bunkie could result in a lack of attention in a firefight.

Anecdotal, I know, but what’s up with the DOD reporting no problem meeting enlistment goals and the story that broke this week Army Stops Many Soldiers From Quitting?

That can’t be good for morale, in an “All Volunteer Force”. Seems The Pres. is taking the Volunteer out of the phrase.

David,

Although I would normally agree with you in that there is pressure to support your boss (Bush) and his wishes (Iraq), this poll was completely random and anonymous, the results even being shipped to a third party firm to tabulate the results by machine. (The poll notes are at the bottom of the article.) Therefore, I think we can trust that the troops were being completely honest.

Furthermore, you point out that there are substantial portions of our military that do not support Bush and the war, which is to be expected in a democracy, but they are overwhelmingly outnumbered by those that do support our president and the mission.

Dustin, what is to be expected? We have a volunteer army, and who are the people volunteering for military service in this country? Add in the element of regimental thinking, and you don’t exactly get a hotbed of dissent for the policies of a wartime conservative president.

Dustin, it would be a stretch to disagree with the comments you just made. Thanks for info. on how the study was conducted, it would appear from what you said, the survey was valid and reliable. Missed that in the link.

What you say about the troops support for the President is true just as it was with the military advisors sent by JFK to Viet Nam and the initial buildup under Johnson.

There is no question in my mind however, that if the losses continue at their current pace until November, these poll numbers may not be reflected so positively by the military in their absentee ballots. Especially as Bush opponents hammer away at their view that these losses were unnecessary had we brought in the U.N. with diplomacy and a bit of patience, and we continue to fail to bring in more coalition of the willing troop support.

It is disturbing to hear the attacks are up after Hussein’s capture. This is not a good sign.

Stephen, you inadvertently, I think, made the author’s point. It IS an all volunteer Army. The vast majority of those ols are coming from the poorest of families and are very diverse, economically and racially. If one is to subscribe to the Left propaganda, these are PRECISELY the people who should have the MOST disdain for conservatism in our society. Yet these folks overwhelmimgly support this nation. Again, and I know this really angers the Left, Americans are more intelligent than the Left gives them credit for.

Jeff, I think the 52% of Americans who still believe Hussein was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks says a lot about American political ignorance. Don’t know about intelligence, that is probably the same the world over in the first few years in life, and then drops precipitously for a nation’s population depending upon average family earnings, quality of life, and amount of universal education in the society.

You know it is like the Medicare overhaul. A recent article reports Americans believe it is a good program, until they are informed of the criticisms of it (mostly leftist criticisms) then the very same folks by a major majority change their mind and say it was an awful piece of legislation. It is about ignorance, not intelligence. Leftists, know this as well as rightists, hence the spin game which permeates both sides of politics.

I think the idea that the left are all angry at low income people supporting the conservative agenda is unfairly broad, and in my case not true at all.

I can understand the historical and religious reasons why many people at that level support Republicans. I don’t agree it’s the best thing for them, but then I can’t decide that myself. I decide for myself, and everybody else I must persuade.

I do believe that their support for conservative politicians is costing them jobs and making their lives more difficult, but I suppose they’re catching on to that themselves. Why else would a normally free-trade mad kind of guy like Bush impose Steel Tariffs? He was trying to appeal to rustbelt Reagan Democrats.

But all that support he gets from these people depends on their perception that he cares about their lot in life. If that point seems to escape him, from their point of view, a number of them may decide he’s not so attractive anymore. Same with the soldiers in the field.

This is not the time for your people to brag. The next year decides whether Bush stays in office.

I had thought some about this survey, after Dustin posted this entry, and I wanted to say a few things about this.

First of all, regarding Mr. Remer’s first comment - The 56% figure was for the U.S. Army only, not for the entire military. For the rest of the military, only 52% surveyed support the President’s Iraq policy. And because 56% of those who returned those questionnaires expressed their approval of the President’s Iraq policy does not necessarily mean that 46% opposed it… There could also have been those who did not respond to that question, or had mixed feelings about the issue, and their views didn’t fall into either category. I suspect this could be true, because in the survey of the rest of the military, the results stated that while 52% approve of the President’s handling of the Iraq situation, about 25% oppose it. So there seem to be many who did not fall into either category.

Relevant paragraph from the article:
“The Army, which has borne the heaviest burden in Iraq in terms of workload and casualties, also is less approving than the rest of the military: 52 percent approved of Bush’s Iraq policy, while about one in four opposed it.”

Also, the point that Mr. Remer made in his first comment, regarding the reluctance of military personnel to go against their leaders, is true, and likely was a factor in this survey, despite the fact that it was anonymous. Polls and surveys of those in the military are different from polls and surveys of civilians - there is a totally different atmosphere among those who are serving, and there are different expectations for them.

Yes, the questionnaires were anonymous; however, there is still going to be that fear factor - the article itself seems to acknowledge this, in the bottom of its first section:

…The poll also demonstrates a large obstacle to probing military members’ opinions on controversial political issues: their hesitance to express those opinions publicly, even behind the anonymity of a poll.

About one in five Military Times Poll respondents either declined to answer questions about Bush and Iraq or said they had no opinion.

“You just don’t do it,” Peters said. “One of the reasons I retired when I did was I wanted to write about political issues. Expressing political opinions was just unacceptable — and also against regulations.”

“I do what I’m told,” said Marine Sgt. Edward J. Leslie, a squad leader in the 2nd Battalion, 2nd Marine Regiment. “I don’t really second-guess the president.”

So despite the fact that it was an anonymous survey, the results should be adjusted for this factor. If we take that into account with respect to the results of the survey, and also take into account that many servicemen and women did not turn one in, it is possible that the percentage of our military personnel who support the President’s handling of the Iraq situation is under 50% - it may still be a plurality, but it may not be a majority.

I noticed elsewhere on the web that some war supporters were surprised that the percentage of military personnel who supported the President’s handling of the Iraq war was not higher. However, that should not at all be surprising to those who have been following the latest news regarding the situations facing our troops in post-war Iraq. In fact, Ralph Peters, the retired Army officer quoted in that article about the survey, reacted to those results by saying that it is “a pleasant surprise” that it is even at 56%.

There has been, over the past couple of years, a great deal of tension between the U.S. Army and Donald Rumsfeld. And many of the current and retired U.S. military generals have been staunchly opposing the policies of the civilians within the Pentagon, charging that these policies have been responsible for damaging our military capabilities and defense forces.

Rummy is very unpopular among much of our military and veteran community, and many of them have been wanting that he resign, or be removed from his position. (Some members of the Pentagon and Bush administration have themselves resigned, in protest of his policies and actions.)

As for our soldiers deployed in Iraq, there has been a major morale dilemma facing them, as the occupation of Iraq has worn on. Even many people who supported the war have acknowledged this, and have urged that major changes be made - there have been controversies regarding what certain Army divisions have been told about their deployments and rotations, vs. what has really occurred. There are also a great many other problems facing our brave and heroic soldiers in Iraq. In my WatchBlog entry right below this one, I linked to a couple of older columns from the famous American war hero and soldiers’ advocate, Col. David Hackworth. A few months ago, there was an interview with Col. Hackworth in Salon, and it is quite interesting. The Colonel had been receiving hundreds of e-mails per day from soldiers deployed overseas, and they helped give him an impression of how things were like in those situations.

See my October 19th entry on the survey of our soldiers deployed in Iraq conducted by Stars and Stripes, the military newspaper. I also described there a situation that occurred within my weekend class, in which those in just my immediate conversation area, all of whom had some personal experiences with the Iraq war situation (through personal or family relationships; also, one was a U.S. Army officer who worked in a military personnel department), seemed to be expressing unanimous sentiments that this was a troubling situation, and was causing a great deal of controversy and frustration among our brave servicemen, and their families.

However, the capture of Saddam Hussein a few weeks ago is the factor that may be responsible for having changed some of this, to a degree. As I said before, that has hopefully raised morale levels among our soldiers deployed overseas. Rev. Donald Sensing had linked to an article that contains some reactions from our soldiers in Iraq to this recent great news.

There are good things going on in Iraq, but there is probably also a lot that our government leaders could do to make things better - better for our brave soldiers, for our people back home, and for our country as a whole. Hopefully, the Bush administration, and the other leaders within our government, will do the right things in the near future.

Aakash, I agree the logic of much of your discussion. On the comment you made:

And because 56% of those who returned those questionnaires expressed their approval of the President’s Iraq policy does not necessarily mean that 46% opposed it… There could also have been those who did not respond to that question, or had mixed feelings about the issue, and their views didn’t fall into either category.

This works in reverse as well, The 56% who approved may also represent many who did not respond to the question, had mixed feelings about the issue and their views didn’t fall neatly into either category so they chose the favorable one as being a bit more in line. It is a wash, whatever argument can be presented to diminish the meaning of the opposed category also applies to the approved category, hence it is a wash, and thus a moot point, statistically speaking.

Maybe they support the war because their officers told them about those 19 Iraqis crashing planes into American buildings?

Just guessing

Of course troops support the war.

They get to watch movies supplied by the government, and at the beginning of every movie the Army has added various propaganda pieces always showing the second plane going into the World Trade Tower, and the damage at the Pentagon, followed by armed services personel saluting and talk about defending America’s shores.

When you see propaganda like that hundreds of time and are isolated from reality and alternative sources of media, you will assume you are doing the right things and for a just cause in spite of reality.

I support Bush and the war completely. Not only are we trying to protect our people and country from another tragic disaster, but we are trying to help the people of Iraq to live a better life- only those ungrateful bastards do not care nor appreciate the American lives that have been lost or what we have tried to do for them.