{"id":65390,"date":"2002-12-20T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2002-12-20T00:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2002\/12\/20\/incomprehensibles-sondages\/"},"modified":"2002-12-20T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2002-12-20T00:00:00","slug":"incomprehensibles-sondages","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/2002\/12\/20\/incomprehensibles-sondages\/","title":{"rendered":"Incompr\u00e9hensibles sondages<\/em><\/strong>"},"content":{"rendered":"

Incompr\u00e9hensibles sondages<\/h2>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t20 d\u00e9cembre 2002 L’opinion am\u00e9ricaine sur la guerre en Irak est un myst\u00e8re. (Un autre myst\u00e8re, c’est le destin du mouvement anti-guerre aux USA, ce qui est dans la logique du premier \u00e9l\u00e9ment.<\/a>) L’id\u00e9e bien ancr\u00e9e en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral dans notre \u00e9valuation de la situation est qu’une vaste majorit\u00e9 des Am\u00e9ricains est en faveur de la guerre. Un sondage dont le Los Angeles Times<\/em> publie et commente les r\u00e9sultats donne des indications qui contredisent en bonne partie cette appr\u00e9ciation. Le public am\u00e9ricain est divis\u00e9, h\u00e9sitant, incertain, il n’a qu’une confiance tr\u00e8s mesur\u00e9e dans l’action du pr\u00e9sident Bush dans ce domaine et croit que l’administration (les principaux conseillers de GW) est partiale et nettement orient\u00e9e vers la guerre. Pour autant, et par instant, ce m\u00eame public affirme des r\u00e9solutions tr\u00e8s fortes sur tel ou tel domaine, dont on peut se demander quel cr\u00e9dit il faut lui accorder dans la r\u00e9alit\u00e9. La r\u00e9ponse n’est nullement \u00e9vidente.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tD’une fa\u00e7on g\u00e9n\u00e9rale, ce sondage est donc pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 comme illustrant l’\u00e9chec de l’administration GW dans ses efforts aupr\u00e8s du public : \u00ab Despite a concerted effort by the Bush administration, more than two-thirds of Americans believe the president has failed to make the case that a war with Iraq is justified, according to a Los Angeles Times poll.<\/em> (Ce sondage est comment\u00e9 par un article accessible directement pendant une semaine sur le site du journal<\/a>. Ensuite, il devient d’acc\u00e8s payant.)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab The overwhelming majority of respondents 90% said they do not doubt that Iraq is developing weapons of mass destruction. But in the absence of new evidence from U.N. inspectors, 72% of respondents, including 60% of Republicans, said the president has not provided enough evidence to justify starting a war with Iraq.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The results underscore the importance of the outcome of U.N. arms inspections underway in Iraq if the Bush administration expects to gain clear public support for an attack.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tD’autres extraits du texte pr\u00e9sentant les r\u00e9sultats du sondage sont repris ci-dessous. Ils refl\u00e8tent bien le climat g\u00e9n\u00e9ral qu’on tente de r\u00e9sumer lorsqu’on dit que l’opinion am\u00e9ricaine sur la guerre est plus un myst\u00e8re qu’une certitude.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tIls permettent \u00e9galement de comprendre l’attitude parfois ambigu\u00eb de l’administration vis-\u00e0-vis de Saddam, du rapport irakien sur les armes de destruction massive, vis-\u00e0-vis de la question des inspections, vis-\u00e0-vis de la question d’\u00e9ventuelles fraudes qui ne seraient pas pour autant consid\u00e9r\u00e9es comme un casus belli<\/em>, etc., toutes ces ambigu\u00eft\u00e9 et h\u00e9sitations semblant en compl\u00e8te contradiction avec l’attitude ultra-belliciste proclam\u00e9e par ailleurs par cette m\u00eame administration.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab The poll also found that support for a possible war appears to be weakening, with 58% saying they support a ground attack on Iraq. In an August Times poll, 64% said they would support a ground attack. Last January, after President Bush first denounced Saddam Hussein in his State of the Union address, the Times and other polls found support for military action greater than 70%.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(…)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb That lack of support may stem from the impression that the president has failed to present enough hard evidence to prove that Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction and is prepared to use them. The administration has spent much of the last three months trying to build a case for war internationally at the United Nations, and domestically during the president’s frenetic campaigning in advance of midterm elections last month.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(…)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The poll also indicates that Americans do not agree with the president’s argument that any error or omission in the arms declaration Iraq sent to the United Nations earlier this month is adequate to justify war. Instead, 63% of respondents said war would be justified only if the United Nations finds a pattern of serious violations by Iraq. Just 22% agreed with the administration’s position; 6% said it would depend on the nature of the omissions; and 9% said they were not sure or declined to reply. Almost six in 10 say it is unlikely that the U.N. inspectors will find Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb If U.N. inspections fail to turn up evidence of Iraqi weapons programs, almost half of respondents said they would oppose war. Only 41% would favor war, and 10% said they don’t know whether they would favor or oppose.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb The Times poll also suggests Americans are more informed about the possibility of war with Iraq, with 84% saying they are following the news closely up from 76% in August. Sixty-three percent of respondents in the recent poll said they feel war is inevitable, 27% said war may or may not occur, and 4% said they believed war would not occur.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Respondents also expressed concern that the president may not be getting balanced information from his advisors. Fifty-one percent of respondents said they believe Bush’s advisors favor going to war; 20% said the advisors present a balanced view; and 11% said the advisors are opposed to war. Roughly a fifth said they are not sure whether Bush’s advisors favor or oppose war.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb If the United States should launch an attack, 68% of Americans want it to be only with the support of the international community. Only 26% said they were willing to support war if the United States acted alone.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t(…)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb However, at least theoretically, Americans agree with the administration’s argument that sometimes preemptive or preventive war is justified. Sixty-four percent of respondents, including 49% of Democrats, believe the United States should reserve the right to launch a preemptive attack against regimes that threaten the country. Only 25% said they opposed such a policy, and 11% said they did not have an opinion on the issue.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb If the United States does go to war, the decision is likely to have serious ramifications at home and abroad, respondents said. Sixty-seven percent said war is likely to increase the threat of terrorist attacks in the United States; 51% said they feel it would destabilize the Middle East; and 45% said it will have a negative effect on the U.S. economy.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb They are also concerned about the possibility of military casualties. Of those who initially said they support a ground attack against Iraq, 18% said they would do so only if no American soldiers are killed. However, support falls off gradually as the theoretical death toll is raised, but 29% said they would support war no matter what the cost in American lives.<\/em> \u00bb<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tUn autre sondage de ABC\/Washington Post<\/em>, \u00e0 peu pr\u00e8s contemporain de celui du Los Angeles Times<\/em>, va dans le m\u00eame sens de cette incertitude. Il confirme, dans certains cas, des situations \u00e9tonnantes, voire compl\u00e8tement absurdes en apparence, par exemple lorsqu’il nous donne l’avis des personnes interrog\u00e9es sur le fait que GW pr\u00e9sente aujourd’hui (en d\u00e9cembre) moins de preuves contre l’Irak (\u00ab evidence against Iraq<\/em> \u00bb) qu’en septembre. De quoi s’agit-il ? Une preuve est une preuve, \u00e0 la fin, c’est-\u00e0-dire un fait, et il ne peut y en avoir moins en septembre qu’en d\u00e9cembre ; \u00e0 moins que tout cela soit une question de perception, n’est-ce pas, d’appr\u00e9ciation, d’\u00e9valuation, d’humeur m\u00eame, et ainsi de suite, et, du coup, les preuves varieraient au gr\u00e9 de la perception et de la manipulation. C’est \u00e9videmment exactement le cas, et cette situation des sondages mesure surtout l’extraordinaire situation de virtualisme o\u00f9 nous nous trouvons, o\u00f9 les preuves, c’est-\u00e0-dire les faits, sont manipul\u00e9es comme sont m\u00e2ch\u00e9s des chewing gum<\/em>, et une preuve n’est finalement rien d’autre que le produit de l’efficacit\u00e9 de l’offensive de la communication, et un jour elle est convaincante (c’est un fait) et le lendemain elle l’est moins et ce n’est plus un fait.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tCi-apr\u00e8s, un extrait significatif de ce sondage ABC\/Washington >MI>Post. (Ce sondage est pr\u00e9sent\u00e9 comme ceci : \u00ab ABCNEWS\/Washington Post poll conducted by telephone Dec. 12-15, among a random national sample of 1,209 adults. The results have a three-point error margin.<\/em> \u00bb)<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\t\u00ab …Most broadly, 62 percent of Americans support U.S. military action against Iraq to force Saddam Hussein from power, unchanged since the end of September. But when those who support military action in general are asked about specific circumstances a major bombing campaign, unilateral action, a ground war, a high casualty ground war support drops below a majority, to anywhere from 50 percent to 30 percent.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Fifty percent of Americans support a major U.S. bombing campaign against Iraqi military targets. Forty-five percent support using U.S. ground troops to invade Iraq, and this falls to 30 percent if it means a high-casualty ground war. Support for military action drops to 42 percent in the face of allied opposition, and to 37 percent if the United Nations opposes it.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\t\u00bb Has Bush presented enough evidence against Iraq? Sept. 14: Yes 48 percent, No 50 percent. Dec. 15: Yes 40 percent, No 58 percent.<\/em> \u00bb <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\tConclusion : les sondages sont devenus illisibles comme disent les sp\u00e9cialistes, c’est-\u00e0-dire, pour notre compte : incompr\u00e9hensibles. Cela est le r\u00e9sultat direct de la politique virtualiste du pouvoir politique, de la manipulation syst\u00e9matique des r\u00e9alit\u00e9s, de la pr\u00e9sentation artificielle du cas de la guerre contre l’Irak, et m\u00eame de la situation surr\u00e9aliste cr\u00e9\u00e9e par la conversation ouverte, publique, depuis pr\u00e8s d’un an (et m\u00eame plus d’un an), sur le point de savoir si l’on attaque. Cette appr\u00e9ciation virtualiste de sang-froid d’un acte de guerre d\u00e9cid\u00e9e sans provocation contribue \u00e0 obscurcir le jugement, \u00e0 troubler les psychologies. Le r\u00e9sultat est le caract\u00e8re insaisissable et incompr\u00e9hensible de l’opinion publique.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

\tLa direction politique n’a \u00e9videmment que ce qu’elle m\u00e9rite, comme on peut le comprendre avec la sym\u00e9trie entre la manipulation virtualiste qu’elle op\u00e8re et le caract\u00e8re fuyant et incertain du public, avec des engagements affirm\u00e9s et puissants mais assortis d’une myriade de conditions contraignantes que ce m\u00eame public affirme dans les sondages. On voit mal comment cette tendance se modifierait avec la guerre, dans la mesure o\u00f9 celle-ci sera \u00e9videmment pr\u00e9sent\u00e9e selon les m\u00eames principes virtualistes et dans la mesure o\u00f9 l’\u00e9quipe GW aura \u00e9videmment le m\u00eame comportement un peu chaotique, en fonction de ce qu’elle per\u00e7oit de l’opinion publique. L’opinion publique aura, de m\u00eame, des engagements tr\u00e8s affirm\u00e9s, tr\u00e8s patriotiques, qui se nuanceront aussit\u00f4t de tout un catalogue de r\u00e9serve qui feront na\u00eetre l’incertitude. C’est une situation tr\u00e8s \u00e9tonnante : non pas pour ou contre la guerre, mais \u00e0 la fois compl\u00e8tement pour et \u00e0 la fois avec une multitude de r\u00e9serves qui minent d’autant la perception de cette r\u00e9solution.<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Incompr\u00e9hensibles sondages 20 d\u00e9cembre 2002 L’opinion am\u00e9ricaine sur la guerre en Irak est un myst\u00e8re. (Un autre myst\u00e8re, c’est le destin du mouvement anti-guerre aux USA, ce qui est dans la logique du premier \u00e9l\u00e9ment.) L’id\u00e9e bien ancr\u00e9e en g\u00e9n\u00e9ral dans notre \u00e9valuation de la situation est qu’une vaste majorit\u00e9 des Am\u00e9ricains est en faveur… <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"neve_meta_sidebar":"","neve_meta_container":"","neve_meta_enable_content_width":"","neve_meta_content_width":0,"neve_meta_title_alignment":"","neve_meta_author_avatar":"","neve_post_elements_order":"","neve_meta_disable_header":"","neve_meta_disable_footer":"","neve_meta_disable_title":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[10],"tags":[2645,857,1492],"class_list":["post-65390","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-faits-et-commentaires","tag-guerre","tag-irak","tag-sondages"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65390","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=65390"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/65390\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=65390"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=65390"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=65390"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}