[Tezcatlipoca]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Mine is a prediction, not a statement of current polls.

Oops, true. My mistake. Interesting poll, still

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Indeed. When we consider that World War I and World war II and the Vietnam War and the War for Independence and the War of 1812 all took longer than one year, I really don't see why people are crying over "not making enough progress."

I do agree that these things take time.

However, the current security situation is hardly great, & I believe that if the "peace" (or aftermath?) had been planned as well as the actual war was, things could have been better than they are now.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

I don't see how that is a "mess." And I certainly don't see how that relates to Bush. South Africa has a lot of crime too. It is a local problem.

It shows how there are still huge security problems in Iraq, with the insurgency/resistance/terrorists/name-of-choice etc. I've lost count of the number of times there has been news of yet another car bombing or other attack.

The current security situation in Iraq relates to the Bush administration because it was the Bush administration which planned & implemented the war in Iraq, & the Bush administration which was in control of Iraq, via the CPA, until the recent handover of sovereignty.

I know that South Africa has a lot of crime. But it is not a rogue state which recently underwent regime change at the hands of the US-led Coalition, & has not had the US in control of it while its crime problems got worse.

And repeated car bombings of troops, Iraqi police, civilians, & other terrorist attacks in Iraq, etc., are hardly similar to a "local crime problem"

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Did you miss this part? The polling firm, Charney Research, is a partisan Democratic polling firm. And superstar Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who's read the study †” and who has worked on similar polling in developing countries †” calls it "very reliable."

Nope, I saw that.

My point re: Murdoch ownership & NYP bias was made because although the poll itself may have been conducted by a legitimate (& actually Democrat rather than Republican) polling firm, the actual article itself was a pro-Bush opinion piece.

Plus it gave me a chance to do a bit of RM bashing by giving a link to an - admittedly unrelated - article about a NYP story which turned out to be rubbish. [yes, I am biased against Murdoch media]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

However, the majority of people are happy, and pleased that the Taliban is no longer in power. Are you not?

As I said in my previous post: "It's good that the Taliban are not in power"

I am glad that the Taliban no longer rule Afghanistan. And, despite being a Guardian-reading liberal do-gooder (for want of a better phrase ), I did actually support the US led war in Afghanistan.

But, be that as it may, Afghanistan is still a mess. Security & quality of life outside of Kabul are not much better than they were before the Taliban were overthrown. The warlords are in many ways just as bad as the Mullahs they have replaced.

Originally Posted by Jerrek

Popular, with who? Foreigners, Europeans, and liberals? Do you really think people will vote for the "bitch?"

Sorry, should probably have said something more like "Extremely popular with Democrats, liberals etc., & utterly despised by Republicans & conservatives".