| Page 2 of 5 < > |
How Low Can He Go?
And Speaking of Polls
|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Nicholas D. Kristof writes in his New York Times opinion column (subscription required): "When President Bush held a public meeting with troops by satellite last fall, they were miraculously upbeat. [Froomkin's note: Remember how it turns out they were coached?] And all along, unrepentant hawks (most of whom have never been to Iraq) have insisted that journalists are misreporting Iraq and that most soldiers are gung-ho about their mission.
"Hogwash! A new poll to be released today shows that U.S. soldiers overwhelmingly want out of Iraq -- and soon. . . .
"Only 23 percent backed Mr. Bush's position that they should stay as long as necessary. In contrast, 72 percent said that U.S. troops should be pulled out within one year. Of those, 29 percent said they should withdraw 'immediately.' "
And the BBC reports: "People across the world overwhelmingly believe the war in Iraq has increased the likelihood of terrorist attacks worldwide, a poll for the BBC reveals.
"Some 60% of people in 35 countries surveyed believe this is the case, against just 12% who think terrorist attacks have become less likely."
It's Better in India
Bill Plante reports on Bush's poor poll number on CBS News this morning, then says: "So what do presidents do when the going gets tough? They leave town."
Indeed, Bush is off today for a whirlwind trip to India and Pakistan (and maybe Afghanistan, too? See below.) Heck, even ambivalence is a step up.
Somini Sengupta writes in the New York Times: "When President Bush lands in India early Wednesday, he will encounter an ever ambivalent American ally with one important difference from the past: this India has new power to assert its views, some of which align with Mr. Bush's agenda and some of which do not. . . .
"The Pew Global Attitudes Project found Indians last year to be among the most cheerful in their appraisal of both the United States and President Bush. In a survey published this week in the Indian newsweekly Outlook , two-thirds of Indians 'strongly' or 'somewhat' regarded Mr. Bush as 'a friend of India,' even as 72 percent called the United States 'a bully.' . . .
"Even the most avid proponents of the new partnership are circling the sovereignty wagons. A senior Indian government official, who did not want to be quoted for fear of jeopardizing the continuing talks, said the future course of relations might hinge on the tendency of the Bush White House to cast nations as either adversary or ally.
"India, the official made clear, can be neither. 'This is a very sovereignty-conscious country,' the official said."
Richard Keil and Catherine Dodge write for Bloomberg: "President George W. Bush is scaling back his expectations for signing a nuclear-technology accord with India this week that would cement U.S. relations with a rising global power and ease pressure on world energy supplies.



