Ralph Johansen wrote: > > And one crucial difference here is that the colonists were British. It > would be a hard stretch to call the Iraqis who support the invasion and > occupation "loyalists". Although I suppose this administration could > manage it.
I think the emphasis should be on the (rather generally applicable) perception that when 1/3 (actually, 1/5 might do it) of a population are strongly committed to a negative point, they become rather difficult to suppress. Living in an electoral democracy tends to blur this point by over-emphasizing the need for majority support. Some of us predicted on the basis of polls in Iraq showing something like 15% core rejection of the occupation that the Occupation was a dead duck. Others, carrying over irrelevant electoral habits, made a big fuss about the large numbers not wanting immediate withdrawal -- numbers which were really irrelevant. Carrol
