80% Of Pakis Say America Not Wanted Hunting Al Qaeda In Pakistan
Only 44% of Pakis say the Pakistan Army should pursue Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
Pakistanis show only weak support for using force against Islamic militants and overwhelmingly oppose allowing outside forces to combat al Qaeda on Pakistani territory.
A WorldPublicOpinion.org poll finds that just 44 percent of urban Pakistanis favor sending the Pakistani army to the Northwestern tribal areas to “pursue and capture al Qaeda fighters.” Only 48 percent would allow the Pakistan army to act against “Taliban insurgents who have crossed over from Afghanistan.” In both cases, about a third oppose such military action and a fifth decline to answer.
Pakistanis reject overwhelmingly the idea of permitting foreign troops to attack al Qaeda on Pakistani territory. Four out of five (80%) say their government should not allow American or other foreign troops to enter Pakistan to pursue and capture al Qaeda fighters.” Three out of four (77%) oppose allowing foreign troops to attack Taliban insurgents based in Pakistan.
These are some of the results of a poll of 907 Pakistanis conducted in urban areas Sept. 12-28, 2007. The findings also reveal that a majority of urban Pakistanis believe their government’s decision to attack militants holding the Red Mosque in Islamabad was a mistake.
Polling took place before the massive suicide bombing apparently targeting former Prime Minster Benazir Bhutto on her return from eight-years in exile. More than 130 people among the massive crowds celebrating Bhutto’s return died in the attack.
Pakistanis show little confidence in the leaders who have dominated Pakistani politics for much of the last 20 years. Less than a third express support for either current president Pervez Musharraf or former prime ministers Benazir Bhutto and Nawaz Sharif.
Steven Kull, director of WorldPublicOpinion.org, comments, “The Pakistani people are not enthusiastic about Musharraf, do not support his recent crackdown on fundamentalists, and are lukewarm at best about going after al Qaeda or the Taliban in western Pakistan. It appears that a US strategy that rests on Musharraf being a frontline in the war on terrorism has poor prospects.”
(WPO)
Be respectful of others and their opinions. Inflammatory remarks and inane leftist drivel will be deleted. It ain’t about free speech, remember you’re in a private domain. My website, my prerogative.
If you can't handle using your real email address, don't bother posting a comment.
World Public Opinion eh? They sound trustworthy,
October 31st, 2007 at 9:49 amlike Marxism Today.
Still, what about war gives the enemy a democratic vote
in our warfighting tactics?
I’ll bet this carried by BBC* news tommorrow.
And let me guess, they took this poll in the northwest tribal area lol these polls are a bunch of poo
October 31st, 2007 at 11:27 amI checked out WorldPublicOpinion.org’ website. They seem to be a lefty organization dedicated to negotiated world peace. They are supported by some one-world-order devoted to socialism sort of “charities.” Their “polls” always seem to find that no one supports America. Negotiations with monsters is not an option. This poll is bogus. I don’t believe that Pakistanis want to live with Al Qaeda and the Taliban.
October 31st, 2007 at 4:03 pmThere is not a country on earth that wants an outside power to control any aspect of their domestic problems, Pakistan included.
October 31st, 2007 at 9:57 pmKipp,
Al Qaeda is more than a Pakistan domestic problem.
November 1st, 2007 at 1:31 amYou have heard of Al Qaeda? You do know that GWOT is more than a cute bumper sticker?
Is your last name Kucinich? You sound stupid enough to be him.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t interfere in Pakistan’s Al-Qaeda problem. In fact I have always contended that the US was foolish to attack Iraq while OBL and Al-Qaeda were operational. I also contend that it should have been Pakistan we invaded in 2003. Does that sound Kucinich like? Before you insult understand the debate, knee jerk. The debate for the academically challenged is about why Pakistan is 80% against US involvement in affairs within their borders. My point was no nation wants others to deal with their problems. Comprende?
November 1st, 2007 at 10:21 am“Four out of five (80%) say their government should not allow American or other foreign troops to enter Pakistan to PURSUE and CAPTURE AL Qaeda fighters.” Three out of four (77%) oppose allowing foreign troops to attack Taliban insurgents based in Pakistan. Comprende?
What you said was” There is not a country on earth that wants an outside power to control any aspect of their DOMESTIC problems, Pakistan included. Once again. This is a world problem.
Like you said in your last post,”Before you insult understand the debate, knee jerk.” Comprende?
November 1st, 2007 at 9:17 pmYou’re not real bright, are you? Since they are talking about US getting involved within their borders that makes it a domestic problem. We have an illegal immigration problem in this country. If Canada sent in the Mounties to deal with the problem without our consent, would that be termed an infringement on our sovereignty? I think it would. In the eyes of the Pakistanis, this is obviously how they see the issue. If they didn’t think it would violate their sovereignty (a domestic issue, for sure) they would not vote 80% disapproval. You far right wingers crack me up. You do not have the capacity to view things through others’ eyes in order to make reality judgments. It clouds your ability to make sound decisions; a real shame.
November 2nd, 2007 at 6:09 pm