Thursday, January 04, 2007
Iraqis say they were better off under rule of Saddam Hussein
Iraq Centre for Research and Strategic Studies/Gulf Research Center conducted face-to-face interviews with 2,000 Iraqi adults living in major cities. The interviews were conducted in November 2006. The margin of error in such a poll is 3.1%.
According to GlobalResearch.ca the results for the question "Do you feel the situation in the country is better today or better before the U.S.-led invasion?" are:
Better today 5%
Better before 90%
Not sure 5%
Let's hope this puts an end to the oft-repeated myth that the Iraqis are better off after the American invasion than they were under Saddam Hussein. They don't think so.
[Hat Tip: Rhosgobel: Radagast's home]
And I'm sure if asked a typical German in 1945, they would have claimed to have been better off back in '38 when Hitler was in power.
ReplyDeleteSo what's your point?
Pretty short-sighted of you, Larry. I don't intend on insulting you personally with this comment, but this is just inane. What is this, an exercise in values clarification?
ReplyDeleteNo one ever asks those who were killed if they are better off.
ReplyDeleteNo one ever asks those who were killed if they are better off.
ReplyDeleteWe don't know that for sure. Several hundred have been murdered since last November. Maybe some of them were interviewed by the pollsters?
So what's your point?
ReplyDeleteThe point is that the administration as well as it's fellow travelers on the neocon right have been claiming that the Iraqis were better off being liberated from an oppressive tyrant. Setting aside that it looks as though an oppressive secular regime is simply being replaced by an oppressive Islamic theocracy (where have we seen this before? Iraq's neighbor to the east comes to mind.), most Iraqis do not agree with the assessment, going on 5 years after the fact to boot.