I think it's unreasonable to think that such a poll should be construed as if everything were great in Iraq. The Christians have suffered and Iraq's sectarian violence appears to have done to the Christians what previously cleared out the Jews of Iraq. And the point about former Sunni privilege is apt. Sunnis consider Shia as heretics and have similar views in Iraq to those of Americans during the Jim Crow era had toward black people.

Things aren't great. But are they mostly better? Would seem so. Having spent years in Central Asia, this makes sense to me. All options are, by American standards, rather awful. Think of your great grandfather's time and our own bloody history. The road is long and very hard. The legacy of terrible oppression deeper than most Americans can fathom.

Brian, Davis, CA

Appears as if BBC poll was oversampled in Anbar province - the places where most of the violence is.

Talk about BIAS

John, New York, NY

I think asking Iraqis wether they face civil war or not is one way of getting a positive view of how things are. The majority will say no. If you were instead to ask them, how is everyday life now? You would get a far far gloomier answer. Thats the difference between this poll and the BBC's. Iraq is facing terminal decline in living standards. But perhaps not an immediate civil war. Is life in Iraq now much worse than under Saddam? without a doubt. Thats what these two polls show. That Iraq is a country with a strong national sentiment, but the lives of ordinary Iraqi is extremely volatile and grim.

Ruairi, Brighton,

This does make you question the doom and gloom polls, reported prominently and regularly by Western outlets including the BBC. - perhaps those are based heavily on refugees and Sunnis? Goes to show that the story is more complicated. As for blogs, these represent the opinions of individuals, who have a strong point of view (do we know the bloggers' backgrounds - how many people who lost privileges they enjoyed under Saddam?) and the facility and time to voice it on the web. Granted, polling is unreliable in a place like Iraq, but blogs??

Ravi, Warren, NJ

They do the breakdown by urban/rural, and by city/region with Baghdad numbers on their own. Go look at the full report available on their website.

Hawke, Albuquerque, NM, USA

The views of Iraq in total were not separated from the views of those residing in Baghdad, where the majority of sectarian violence is. Why not?

Jack Hilden, Tampa, Fl. /USA

"This poll does not reflect the feels of those who I receive e-mails from or whose Baghdad blogs I read."

Talk abouit a completely unscientific poll. You know, the soldiers I have met and comunicated with IN IRAQ would agree with the poll results.

"I met many Iraqi refugees when I was in Jordan and Syria who do not reflect the number in your polls."

Well, since the poll is of people CURRENTLY IN IRAQ, then maybe your "sources" in Syria and Jordan haven't a clue about the true state in Iraq. It's also quite likely that since YOUR "sources" are refugees no longer living in Iraq, perhaps they are Saddam sympathizers who miss the halcyon days of wanton murder, rape and torture carried out by Saddam, his family and their supporters. Two sides to every coin, eh Cathleen? lol

MIke, Milwaukee, Wisconsin

This poll does not reflect the feels of those who I receive e-mails from or whose Baghdad blogs I read. Were those polled living in the Green Zone or Jordan? There are many corrupt policians and government employees making millions from the US occupation. It sounds like those were the ones you interviewed.

I met many Iraqi refugees when I was in Jordan and Syria who do not reflect the number in your polls. I met many Christian Iraqis, who fled Iraq because of the Islamic Fundamentalist, who left under the threat of death.

Cathleen Krahe, Carbondale, US/Colorado

Yeah, but to get a realistic picture the researchers should really have convassed opinion OUTSIDE the greeen zone!

Kenneth, London, UK

If there are one million Iraqis who have left the country, and 35% of this poll say they have a family member who has left, and if 26% say they have had a family member killed, then the Lancet estimate would seem to be correct. At least 600,000 Iraqis have died as the result of the invasion.

Don McEwing, Tigard, OR, USA

You're drawing some pretty cheerful assessments from some rather mixed data.

If you look at the poll's data, nowhere in it did it say that people prefered life today than under Saddam. Rather, it said that a majority preferred the current "political system" as opposed to the previous one. Indeed, looking at the data, the current political system is favorable to Sh'ia. Not su much for the Sunni, however, who prefered Saddam's system of government by a nearly 2-1 margin, or for the Kurds surveyed, who said they would rather have an independent government, than the current centralized one.

Amongst other things, the survey says that 53% of Iraqis believe that the security situation will improve in Iraq once Coalition forces withdraw, as compared to 32% who disagree. These percentages are significantly higher if you ignore the Kurdish region, largely spared from combat.

Mark Kraft, Santa Clara, CA, USA

Maybe President Bush actually knows what he is doing!

Ryan, Fort Collins, CO

Good news, indeed. Not just for America and the other Coalition nations, but mostly for the people of Iraq.
There is still hope and promise for that nation. Its potentional is mind-boggling.
Let's all just hope that Iraq lives up to it.

Robert Conner, Claremore, OK USA

What really is bugging me is that this story can't seem to be found on most of the major news online sites. Why would that be? Why would a news company want to hold back news which appears to show that some things are going "right" in Iraq?

I stumbled onto this on Fox News and then checked CNN and BBC and nothing.

If time allows I'm going to record further searches, because there is something here that is very educational. I think I have been ignoring the statements I've been hearing that certain "news" companies only pass along stories that match their own agenda. I don't think that was what folks wanted a long time ago when they were asking for "freedom of the press", is it?

Michael, Tokyo, Japan

Well, clearly the Iraq's aren't as smart as the reporters and editors at The Guardian, the BBC, the New York Times, or Washington Post. Surely we need to eduate them on their ignorance and let them know that all is bad in their country. Besides, we all know America and Britain couldn't have done the right thing in Iraq, those esteemed journals and perveyors of what they call "the news" tell us so daily. Amazing how they can't even see how bad off they are now and what a paragon of virtue and enlightened leadership Saddam and his two glorious, caring sons were. How foolish can they be?

Jim Dixey, Bryan, Texas, USA

I am heartened to see the Iraqis rejecting the patronising attitude of some of your political columnists (most notably Matthew Parris) that they are too tribalistic, primitive and violent to handle that sophisticated concept we Westerners call "Democracy".
That they are suffering a Nash equilibrium similar to that in Northern Island, has long been obvious to some of us; that they also have the ability to cooperate to break it, is a confirmation of their long long history of civilisation.
If only we stay the course, Mr Blair will get another legacy to add to his Good Friday Agreement.

Reg Brissenden, Dorchester, Dorset UK