Iraq: Four Years Later

(CBS)  After four years of war, Americans are increasingly pessimistic about the prospects for success in Iraq and a majority wants U.S. troops to begin coming home, according to an analysis of data from CBS News and CBS News/New York Times polls.

Americans did not expect the war to last this long, nor did they think it would cost as many lives as it has.

President Bush continues to receive low ratings on his handling of Iraq and most Americans now oppose his decision to send more troops there. Democrats, meanwhile, are challenging Mr. Bush's Iraq policy, winning House committee approval this week for a troop withdrawal deadline of Sept. 1, 2008, but suffering defeat in the Senate on a separate plan to end the war.

More than half the public now believes the U.S. will not succeed in Iraq. A February poll found that just 20 percent think there's something the U.S. can do to stop the fighting between Iraqis, while 70 percent think there's not much the U.S. can do about it.

WILL THE U.S. SUCCEED IN IRAQ?

3/2007
Very likely
11%
Somewhat likely
34%
Not very/at all likely
53%

Nearly seven in ten Americans now say things are going badly for the U.S. in Iraq; just 29 percent say things are going well. That's a complete reversal from May 2003, two months into the war, when more than seven in 10 thought things in Iraq were going well. Assessments remained positive until shortly after Saddam Hussein was captured in December 2003. Since then, however, views have become gloomier.

The war has been longer and bloodier than Americans expected. At the start of the war, Americans thought it would be a short conflict with fewer than 1,000 fatalities. Since then, over 3,200 U.S. troops have died and more than 24,000 have been wounded.

Asked in March 2003 how many U.S. troops they thought would die in the war, 66 percent of Americans said less than 1,000. Just 22 percent thought more than 1,000 U.S. soldiers would be killed.

EXPECTATIONS FOR U.S. LOSS OF LIFE

3/20-3/24/2003
Less than 1,000
66%
1,000-5,000
16%
More than that
6%

Tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians have also been killed in the war, but precise figures are difficult to come by. Estimates range from more than 50,000 into the hundreds of thousands, the Associated Press says. The U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq reports more than 34,000 deaths in 2006 alone.

In April 2003, just weeks after the fall of Baghdad, seven in 10 Americans thought U.S. troops would be in Iraq for two years or less. Only 27 percent thought they'd be there longer than two years.

Now, Americans indicate they're ready for the troops to start coming home. Fifty-six percent want to decrease U.S. troop levels or remove all U.S. forces from Iraq. Nearly six in ten oppose President Bush's decision to deploy more than 20,000 additional troops to Iraq.

U.S. TROOP LEVELS IN IRAQ SHOULD…

3/2007
Increase
22%
Keep the same number
17%
Decrease
28%
Remove all troops
28%

Americans give the president some leeway, however. More than half think it will take at six months to determine if the troop increase is working.

Despite the political arguments that have surrounded the troop and funding decisions, more than seven in ten Americans say one can oppose the war and still support U.S. troops.

The American people continue to give Mr. Bush low marks for his leadership on Iraq. His current approval rating is 28 percent; he has not reached the 30 percent mark since October 2006.

That's a far cry from April 2003, after the fall of Baghdad, when Mr. Bush enjoyed a high of 79 percent approval. But as U.S. troops continued to suffer casualties, even after the president's declaration that major combat had ended, more Americans began to disapprove of Mr. Bush's handling of the war. There was a brief surge in support following Saddam's capture, but more Americans have disapproved than approved of the president's handing of the war since March 2004.

Mr. Bush has also been hurt by the recent reports of shoddy treatment of veterans at the Walter Reed Army Medical Center. Three in four Americans do not think the Bush administration has done enough to care for these wounded soldiers.

[reillybinx]

The senators are sure taking a chance in angering
the hispanic vote by going after Gonzales.
Many I have talked to are very protective of
him. They should drop the matter or we will
suffer consequences and voters.

[hurst071]

This is some interesting reading and it reminds me of why I don%u2019t read these things. I have to ask what qualifications some of you have to speak with such "expertise" on Iraq and insurgent activities? I%u2019m guessing not much real experience (books and protest rallies don%u2019t count..oh yea trips to Dubi and movies don%u2019t count either). I have met several Iraqis who put their life on the line everyday for a better life and are doing so because they want to, it was our support that gave them that opportunity. Do I think the "war plan" could have been better? Yes I do, but then again I chalk the "plan" up to making those Americans happy that have forgot that wars are not pretty and that one needs to be just as aggressive and militant as your enemy in order to put fear into them so they will cringe at the thought of attacking you. But we will come back to reality where we must fight wars in a "touchy feely" manner as not to upset people. I%u2019m not a evil crusader, but insurgents only know one thing, brutality. Look at the insurgents in Chechnya, the Taliban, Kumar Rouge, and now the Takfirist, Sulfis and Wahabis. Oh well my 2 cents to all those individuals that have never lost someone to combat or looked into the eyes of a known insurgent. Some of you should try it sometime you may change your mind.

[j-whitman]

Here's what some of our troops think, 9th Cavalry Regiment - Link from conservative news DRUDGE REPORT - They don' like it much.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=070320004302.w8d2wm3v&show_article=1

[middleman8]

"four years latter still in Iraq"

toldyouso21
Very well put ,good explanation .

[seniorengine]

If our troops would leave today or in 50 years, there will be a civil war in Iraq. People in the mid-east have been fighting for thousands of years. They're all nuts. George Bush is a real zippy the pinhead. He is too stupid to realize it. Cut the losses and come home. Spend all of time and wasted effort from the war to throw Rice, Cheney, and Bush in jail.

[toldyouso21]

4 years later still in Baghdad?

We are still fighting insurgents in Baghdad during all these 4 years. How long it will take to flush them out of Iraq and take control of the country?
Posted by diplomacy3 at 05:46 PM : Mar 19, 2007


Answer your own question: How long would you resist and continue to rebel against strangers who invaded America? Even if they claim they are "freeing you" from the "Republican Monsters", deposed Bush and said they were bringing you a better form of government? At what point should you just roll over and accept the invaders? At what point would you forgive them for bombing this country, maybe killing or torturing your loved ones, destroying your society and culture and forcing you to have their type of government? When do you lay down your love and loyalty for your own sovereignty and accept the mastery of those who came uninvited to remake your world?

When you can answer that, you have the answer to how long we will be fighting resistance in Iraq.

Either that, or we kill all men of fighting age and maybe even all boys and first borns to ensure no one is left to hate us for what we did to them.

[diplomacy3]

4 years later still in Baghdad?

We are still fighting insurgents in Baghdad during all these 4 years. How long it will take to flush them out of Iraq and take control of the country?

[toldyouso21]

We started it, we've got to somehow finish it. We cannot abandon the Iraqi people like we did before. Our credibility in the world is already at an all time low, if nations can't trust us to finish what we start then we'll never regain any respect.
Posted by Sprvtr at 11:53 AM : Mar 19, 2007


How is it that the invaders and instigators of this horrorible war (that would be the US) is soooo perverted that we continually pretend we are saviours and heros of the Iraqi people instead of admitting and accepting our true role?

we did start it and we made a huge mess of it and many people who had managed to survive Saddam all those years are now dead to the war we started. But in the middle of our rampage, we put these rusted coat hangers over our heads and declare them halos. It is as if we were that dad who stabbed his 11 month old baby and threw it out of the window, now showing up--insisting he and only he can perform CPR to save the kid. Who in their right mind buys the "saviour theory" except the pscho trying to emotionally masturb@te their own conscience?

[sprvtr]

We started it, we've got to somehow finish it. We cannot abandon the Iraqi people like we did before. Our credibility in the world is already at an all time low, if nations can't trust us to finish what we start then we'll never regain any respect.

[wizest]

We went to war with Britain against Germany for a honest reason. We had a sneak attack on Pearl Harbor
by Japan. We fought on two fronts, on two oceans, on each side of our country, defeated them both in four years.
Why, are we in Iraq?