Skip to main content

Le Moyne College/Zogby Poll

Released: February 28, 2006

U.S. Troops in Iraq: 72% Say End War in 2006

  • Le Moyne College/Zogby Poll shows just one in five troops want to heed Bush call to stay “as long as they are needed”
  • While 58% say mission is clear, 42% say U.S. role is hazy
  • Plurality believes Iraqi insurgents are mostly homegrown
  • Almost 90% think war is retaliation for Saddam’s role in 9/11, most don’t blame Iraqi public for insurgent attacks
  • Majority of troops oppose use of harsh prisoner interrogation
  • Plurality of troops pleased with their armor and equipment

An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and nearly one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.

The poll, conducted in conjunction with Le Moyne College’s Center for Peace and Global Studies, showed that 29% of the respondents, serving in various branches of the armed forces, said the U.S. should leave Iraq “immediately,” while another 22% said they should leave in the next six months. Another 21% said troops should be out between six and 12 months, while 23% said they should stay “as long as they are needed.”

Different branches had quite different sentiments on the question, the poll shows. While 89% of reserves and 82% of those in the National Guard said the U.S. should leave Iraq within a year, 58% of Marines think so. Seven in ten of those in the regular Army thought the U.S. should leave Iraq in the next year. Moreover, about three-quarters of those in National Guard and Reserve units favor withdrawal within six months, just 15% of Marines felt that way. About half of those in the regular Army favored withdrawal from Iraq in the next six months.

The troops have drawn different conclusions about fellow citizens back home. Asked why they think some Americans favor rapid U.S. troop withdrawal from Iraq, 37% of troops serving there said those Americans are unpatriotic, while 20% believe people back home don’t believe a continued occupation will work. Another 16% said they believe those favoring a quick withdrawal do so because they oppose the use of the military in a pre-emptive war, while 15% said they do not believe those Americans understand the need for the U.S. troops in Iraq.

The wide-ranging poll also shows that 58% of those serving in country say the U.S. mission in Iraq is clear in their minds, while 42% said it is either somewhat or very unclear to them, that they have no understanding of it at all, or are unsure. While 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.”

“Ninety-three percent said that removing weapons of mass destruction is not a reason for U.S. troops being there,” said Pollster John Zogby, President and CEO of Zogby International. “Instead, that initial rationale went by the wayside and, in the minds of 68% of the troops, the real mission became to remove Saddam Hussein.” Just 24% said that “establishing a democracy that can be a model for the Arab World" was the main or a major reason for the war. Only small percentages see the mission there as securing oil supplies (11%) or to provide long-term bases for US troops in the region (6%).

The continuing insurgent attacks have not turned U.S. troops against the Iraqi population, the survey shows. More than 80% said they did not hold a negative view of Iraqis because of those attacks. About two in five see the insurgency as being comprised of discontented Sunnis with very few non-Iraqi helpers. “There appears to be confusion on this,” Zogby said. But, he noted, less than a third think that if non-Iraqi terrorists could be prevented from crossing the border into Iraq, the insurgency would end. A majority of troops (53%) said the U.S. should double both the number of troops and bombing missions in order to control the insurgency.

The survey shows that most U.S. military personnel in-country have a clear sense of right and wrong when it comes to using banned weapons against the enemy, and in interrogation of prisoners. Four in five said they oppose the use of such internationally banned weapons as napalm and white phosphorous. And, even as more photos of prisoner abuse in Iraq surface around the world, 55% said it is not appropriate or standard military conduct to use harsh and threatening methods against insurgent prisoners in order to gain information of military value.

Three quarters of the troops had served multiple tours and had a longer exposure to the conflict: 26% were on their first tour of duty, 45% were on their second tour, and 29% were in Iraq for a third time or more.

A majority of the troops serving in Iraq said they were satisfied with the war provisions from Washington. Just 30% of troops said they think the Department of Defense has failed to provide adequate troop protections, such as body armor, munitions, and armor plating for vehicles like HumVees. Only 35% said basic civil infrastructure in Iraq, including roads, electricity, water service, and health care, has not improved over the past year. Three of every four were male respondents, with 63% under the age of 30.

The survey included 944 military respondents interviewed at several undisclosed locations throughout Iraq. The names of the specific locations and specific personnel who conducted the survey are being withheld for security purposes. Surveys were conducted face-to-face using random sampling techniques. The margin of error for the survey, conducted Jan. 18 through Feb. 14, 2006, is +/- 3.3 percentage points.

(2/28/2006)

Buy the whole report!

Popular posts from this blog

STATEMENT BY THEFAYTH ABOUT THE BISEXUAL COMMUNITY

STATEMENT BY THEFAYTH ABOUT THE BISEXUAL COMMUNITY

By thefayth, BiNet USA President
With additional edits/support from Juba Kalamka, BiNet USA VP

Bisexual communities have been notified of my intent to remove my networks, support and help from those who center white supremacy or practice trans exclusionary radical feminism. Simply put, I do not believe bisexual exclusionary communities (or beci's) to represent the bisexual community.

When I emailed, messaged and tweeted at "Jayne Shea" and messaged her last Tuesday, I did so because I'd seen Seattle continuing to thrive with TERF's, or people who exclude trans people.

It occurred to me, that the same group reported to BiNet USA for allowing cis only women was possibly closely associated with Jayne Shea; this has now been confirmed. And now the rest is history, Black-bisexual-intersex-trans history as I, thefayth, recently became more public in my transition from assumed cis female to known intersex trans multi-gender…

No, I didn’t attempt to steal the bisexual pride flag

No, I didn’t attempt to steal the bisexual pride flag
(but people I knew said I did, so did "the news")
By the artist formerly known as Faith Cheltenham, and the activist formerly known as thefayth

With my stepping away from bisexual community; I am returning home to those who love me; not something always found in bisexual, or LGBTQIA communities. The true upheaval for me personally is most profound in that I turn away from the concept of giving, entirely. thefayth is no more as I must admit I have no faith in humans, if I ever did. Further, I decline to serve with my body, my mind or spirit to provide such faith to humans without benefit to me first and always.

My bigger shame? Direct donating hundreds of thousands of dollars to advocacy between 2004-2017 focused on bi communities worldwide, while also working for free at same time; I should have picked one or the other!

My shame is particular, in that I feel, I may have been treated better if I’d been giving only to peopl…

The Khalil Lawal Story

Press Release
June 29, 2018
(provided to thefayth at Netroots Nation)

Point of Contact: Crystal Evans
Crystalevans1010@gmail.com
202.643.4911


DEATH OF KHALIL LAWAL BY PHILLY COP JAMES POWELL 

PHOTO OF KHALIL FROM www.socialistalternativephl.org
On January 29th, 2018, after accidentally hitting a pedestrian, Khalil Lawal was approached by Philadelphia Police Officer James Powell—who was off duty at the time—and shot 15 times mere seconds after the encounter. James Powell shot Khalil first at point blank range and then several more times as Khalil was already laid on the ground.

Khalil was unarmed and had not been committing any crimes when Powell approached him from behind with his gun already in hand. Khalil was shot directly in his left eye, his temple, his neck, chest and legs but succumbed to his injuries almost 2 hours after the incident.

In April, the Lawal family discovered that the Philadelphia Police Dept. still had not taken a statement from Powell—about 3 months following the s…