At the time of this writing, 2985 readers have voted in the latest Army Times poll (link), with 1,889 (63.28%) agreeing that the U.S. war effort is grounds for Secretary Rumsfeld to resign. 996 (33.37%) voted no and 100 (3.35%) had no opinion.<\/em> \u00bb Pour notre compte, \u00e0 l’heure o\u00f9 nous mettons cette note en ligne, le r\u00e9sultat est 64,40% (2.404) de r\u00e9ponses positives contre 32,23% (1.203) de r\u00e9ponses n\u00e9gatives. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tDeux observations : l’int\u00e9r\u00eat que soul\u00e8ve la question et la tendance tr\u00e8s forte en faveur de la d\u00e9mission. M\u00eame si le sondage ne garantit en rien que les r\u00e9ponses viennent toutes de militaires, elles viennent dans tous les cas de personnes (les lecteurs de Army Times<\/em>) qui en sont proches. Un sondage du m\u00eame Army Times<\/em> portant sur une question similaire (d\u00e9mission de Rumsfeld et du pr\u00e9sident du JCS, le g\u00e9n\u00e9ral Myers) au moment du scandale d’Abou Ghra\u00efb en mai 2004 (Rumsfeld avait effectivement offert sa d\u00e9mission \u00e0 GW, qui l’avait refus\u00e9e) avait donn\u00e9 : 3,644 (44.58%) en faveur des deux d\u00e9missions, 3,644 (41.07%) contre, 739 (9,04%) pour la d\u00e9mission du seul Rumsfeld. <\/p>\n<\/p>\n\tLa moindre conclusion qu’on puisse tirer de ces divers constats est la confirmation que la r\u00e9volte des g\u00e9n\u00e9raux est loin d’\u00eatre un \u00e9v\u00e9nement accidentel. Elle illustre et d\u00e9couvre une tendance de fond au sein des forces arm\u00e9es am\u00e9ricaines.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\tMis en ligne le 27 avril 2006 \u00e0 22H39<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
C’est un sondage opportun et d’une signification int\u00e9ressante que Army Times a plac\u00e9 sur son site. La question pos\u00e9e concerne Rumsfeld : doit-il d\u00e9missionner comme l’y invitent les g\u00e9n\u00e9raux en col\u00e8re? Le sondage nous a \u00e9t\u00e9 signal\u00e9 par un texte mis en ligne ce matin par RAW Story, et qui indiquait : \u00ab At the… <\/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":[2],"tags":[3289,2604,5160,5331,3856,569,5190,5332,2852],"class_list":["post-67502","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bloc-notes","tag-army","tag-des","tag-generaux","tag-raw","tag-revolte","tag-rumsfeld","tag-sondage","tag-story","tag-times"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67502","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=67502"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67502\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67502"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67502"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/new.dedefensa.org\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67502"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}