Originally Posted by K-I-A 67

Alpha-bitch, I'm gonna warn you, you're getting my male hormones a pumping and the blood pumping to a lower extremity as well. Boy, if I were single, I'd kneel down before thee, using my teeth, I'd gracefully remove your pan... Ah, oh, oh, I forgot there are way to many INTPs in the forum to talk like this, so, never mind.

I see I have competition.

Originally Posted by The Rani

High school girls by definition can't be alpha bitches, any more than a female puppy can be one. It's like a hierarchy of dominant vs. subordinate behavior, and puppies/kids are always on the bottom. However, puppies/kids themselves tend to have dominant vs. submissive personalities, and you can tell pretty early on which ones are which. Or rather, which ones are going to grow into which. It's just a rough analogy when using the dog terms and trying to apply them to humans, because human personalities are much more complex than canine ones, but it's the same idea.

I'm not sure if 'alpha bitch' has formal psychological definition, but I'd tweak the above slightly. Generally, yes, adults are dominant over high school kids, unless the school is pretty dysfunctional. However, expect each clique, each pack within the school, to have its alphas, its dominant personalities. In schools, as within wolf packs, the pattern is to wish to belong to the higher status pack, and to wish to be fairly dominant within a pack.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Mean Girls is an entirely different thing. My personal opinion is that this phenomenon arose as a function of large schools, where kids are left together in artificial settings. They are together for long periods of time, with little to no adult supervision. So when an unruly puppy gets too aggressive with a littermate, there is no alpha adult around to stop it. This happens with boys, too, only it's called bullying. The unruly puppy can be an alpha type or not, but the behavior comes from different sources in different cases. Alpha types operate from a position of strength, while challengers are more insecure.

Bullying is an extension of the dominance struggle. Those with status enjoy proving their status. Juvenile males tend more to physically dominate. Females generally use snark more. The effect is similar, to establish a pecking order. Yes, if you have an aware adult presence, the adults tend to moderate juvenile status struggles, to take down the juvenile alphas a bit, and prevent too much damage -- either physical or emotional -- to those bullied.

But I'm using 'alpha bitch' in a somewhat different context. On this forum, there are those into emotion, dominance and snark of the same type you'd expect among female juvenile humans. There are others into the theory of history, including not a few INTPs. These two groups are almost forming into cliques, into packs, with entirely different methods of establishing dominance. In a high school band clique, playing an instrument really well helps one achieve status. In a high school cheerleading clique, the size and quality of one's wardrobe is a factor. Different cliques have different methods of securing status, of improving one's self esteem. Mikebert, if he finds a neat equation that fits the data, has all the status he needs without caring about those who don't take the time to figure out the equation. Others are ever so pleased with themselves when they manage a really nifty insult. With such divergent values, one shouldn't expect a lot in terms of real communications.

Originally Posted by The Rani

You mean ... like people in cliques who like to talk about burning witches, or putting a queen's head on a pike? I guess you were really pleased with yourself about those posts.

Not so much. Every once in a while I'll play the two paragraph snark and insult game, but I don't consider it a big deal. That's not why I'm here. That one was really aimed more at our junior resident monarchist than anyone else. Alas, he didn't seem to bite. Too subtle, perhaps?

And, yes, I do sometimes write not to the INTPs, but to the two paragraph snark crowd. If you want to communicate, you have to use the methods and values of those one is attempting to communicate with. Thus, if you see me write a two paragraph post full of emotion and insult, you can safely assume I'm not writing to the INTPs.

Actually, I haven't been on this forum since Sunday. Does "It's the week before first semester finals mean anything to you?"

Originally Posted by The Rani

Sorry, I still have no idea what you're trying to "communicate." Sean is a one-man show, not a clique. That's probably why he had no idea what you were talking about, either.

To be technical and nitpicky, Sean is a one-boy show. Think Cato of Utica at the age of 18.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Not so much. Every once in a while I'll play the two paragraph snark and insult game, but I don't consider it a big deal. That's not why I'm here. That one was really aimed more at our junior resident monarchist than anyone else. Alas, he didn't seem to bite. Too subtle, perhaps?

As I recall, one time you and I entered into a so-called fair minded values discussion. As the discussion progressed, I remember lots snark and insults being sent my way during the discussion to firm up your set of values and positions. The snarks and insults persisted then rose to a point that I started countering your snarks and insults with some counter snarks without the insults. My counter snarks appeared reduce the volume or tone of your snarks, so to speak. I basically ignored your insults. Your insults meant nothing to me. You see, I basically had no internal or external guilt nerve for them to strike, so to speak. As I recall, the discussion got a bit nasty. Bob, you messed up, you established the terms then you broke the terms. Once there was no longer a social standard that I was obligated to adhere with, or a Halo existing over your head, I was basically at liberty to intellectually engage utilizing all my capabilities, so to speak.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

And, yes, I do sometimes write not to the INTPs, but to the two paragraph snark crowd. If you want to communicate, you have to use the methods and values of those one is attempting to communicate with. Thus, if you see me write a two paragraph post full of emotion and insult, you can safely assume I'm not writing to the INTPs.

I know one thing, this particular ISTP is still scratching his head wundering which values you are primarily progessing or representing everytime you bring up or mention our differences in values.

Originally Posted by Bob Butler 54

Not so much. Every once in a while I'll play the two paragraph snark and insult game, but I don't consider it a big deal. That's not why I'm here. That one was really aimed more at our junior resident monarchist than anyone else. Alas, he didn't seem to bite. Too subtle, perhaps?

And, yes, I do sometimes write not to the INTPs, but to the two paragraph snark crowd. If you want to communicate, you have to use the methods and values of those one is attempting to communicate with. Thus, if you see me write a two paragraph post full of emotion and insult, you can safely assume I'm not writing to the INTPs.

I'm not an INTP, nor to I belong to the two-paragraph snark crowd (I hope, although I have put in more than my share of nit-picking posts.) So I feel left out. Do advise, is there a place for readers like me for your posts?

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

I'm not an INTP, nor to I belong to the two-paragraph snark crowd (I hope, although I have put in more than my share of nit-picking posts.) So I feel left out. Do advise, is there a place for readers like me for your posts?

No, sensible people have no place here. (sly, winking smiley)

Originally Posted by 13rian

No, sensible people have no place here. (sly, winking smiley)

*slaps you for idiocy*

Originally Posted by sean '90

*slaps you for idiocy*

...was i just challenged to a duel? (mock confusion smiley)

I have stopped reading that thread because it's turned into nothing but a personal catfight between the posters. I also noticed that real criticism on Iraq has migrated to the nearest thread in the Politics & Economics forum.

Shouldn't we have a thread reserved specifically for catfights? Have the moderator transfer posts to that thread when the following statements are observed more than thrice:

1. "Bigot!"

2. "You bigot!"

3. "You're a bigot!"

4. "You're a stupid bigot!"

5. "All you bleeding-heart leftwingers always..."

6. "All you narrow-minded rightwingers always..."

7. "Of all the stupid ignorant things I've ever read, what you just wrote is the most stupid and ignorant!"

8. "x is a stupid bigot, and so are all the rest of you creeps that keep defending x!"

9. "[expletive] [expletive] [expletive] [obscenity] [expletive]!"

10. "This is the stupidest posting I've ever seen!"

11. "Everybody knows that all [some group: progressives, Baptists, linguists, piano tuners, whatever] are stupid!"

Insults courtesy of Suzette Haden Elgin who adds one more,

"Even an [ECONOMIST] should be able to see.....

(Posted with Dr. Elgin's permission, or at least her forgiveness)

Originally Posted by The Wonkette

I'm not an INTP, nor to I belong to the two-paragraph snark crowd (I hope, although I have put in more than my share of nit-picking posts.) So I feel left out. Do advise, is there a place for readers like me for your posts?

Yes.
http://bluebuddies.com/help/smurf_na...the_smurfs.htm

The T4T is like the Smurf village as such:

The Wonkette = Sassette Smurfling
Me, Virgil . = Farmer Smurf
Skabungus = Nat Smurfling
Bob Butler = Poet Smurf
SOC = Smurfette
Odin, Mr. Reed = Handy Smurf
13rian = Painter Smurf
Sean'90 = Snappy Smurfling
...

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Yes.
http://bluebuddies.com/help/smurf_na...the_smurfs.htm

The T4T is like the Smurf village as such:

The Wonkette = Sassette Smurfling
Me, Virgil . = Farmer Smurf
Skabungus = Nat Smurfling
Bob Butler = Poet Smurf
SOC = Smurfette
Odin, Mr. Reed = Handy Smurf
13rian = Painter Smurf
Sean'90 = Snappy Smurfling
...

Once again, I'm happy to be excluded.

Originally Posted by The Rani

Damn, I'm sorry to have missed that exchange. Can you email me a link?

I don't recall seeing it either

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Once again, I'm happy to be excluded.

True enough. I can't make an association. Though...

Grey Badger wrote...


I have stopped reading that thread because it's turned into nothing but a personal catfight between the posters. I also noticed that real criticism on Iraq has migrated to the nearest thread in the Politics & Economics forum.

Shouldn't we have a thread reserved specifically for catfights? Have the moderator transfer posts to that thread when the following statements are observed more than thrice:

1. "Bigot!"

2. "You bigot!"

3. "You're a bigot!"

4. "You're a stupid bigot!"

5. "All you bleeding-heart leftwingers always..."

6. "All you narrow-minded rightwingers always..."

7. "Of all the stupid ignorant things I've ever read, what you just wrote is the most stupid and ignorant!"

8. "x is a stupid bigot, and so are all the rest of you creeps that keep defending x!"

9. "[expletive] [expletive] [expletive] [obscenity] [expletive]!"

10. "This is the stupidest posting I've ever seen!"

11. "Everybody knows that all [some group: progressives, Baptists, linguists, piano tuners, whatever] are stupid!"

Insults courtesy of Suzette Haden Elgin who adds one more,

"Even an [ECONOMIST] should be able to see.....

(Posted with Dr. Elgin's permission, or at least her forgiveness)

Obvious. Nanny Smurf = The Grey Badger.

Nanny Smurf? Aw - I thought Granny Weatherwax, at least. Okay, kids, I'll close the door to the playroom now.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Yes.
http://bluebuddies.com/help/smurf_na...the_smurfs.htm

The T4T is like the Smurf village as such:

The Wonkette = Sassette Smurfling
Me, Virgil . = Farmer Smurf
Skabungus = Nat Smurfling
Bob Butler = Poet Smurf
SOC = Smurfette
Odin, Mr. Reed = Handy Smurf
13rian = Painter Smurf
Sean'90 = Snappy Smurfling
...

Is "SOC" supposed to be "COS" -- namely, moi?

Regarding posts written by INTPs versus those written by other types:

When I first started posting here, I skipped over a lot of the longer posts because my attention span just wasn't there. I was used to shorter, quicker exchanges through email, chat, IM, and listservs.

Over time, I have trained my SJ brain to slow down and read the longer, more involved posts thoroughly and sometimes repeatedly until the understanding and appreciation clicked in. What an opportunity to teach my mind something new, with all of these INTPs, who see the world so differently than I do!

It can be done. It's hard work, but I think it's worthwhile.

Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

Yes.
http://bluebuddies.com/help/smurf_na...the_smurfs.htm

The T4T is like the Smurf village as such:

The Wonkette = Sassette Smurfling
Me, Virgil . = Farmer Smurf
Skabungus = Nat Smurfling
Bob Butler = Poet Smurf
SOC = Smurfette
Odin, Mr. Reed = Handy Smurf
13rian = Painter Smurf
Sean'90 = Snappy Smurfling
...

...................boy, this thread has sure taken an odd turn~

I think this goes down as a first for me. I cant remember ever being likened to a smurf............ever. I am so ignorant on smurfology, I had to follow the link to remember what they were. I wasn't sure if I should be upset or flattered to be on Rag's list of smurf-like beings. I have thought about it and I'm, well, still confused. But at least, from this ENFP's perspective, It's better than the bulk mail snarking that seems to have hit the forum.

.........So, what I want to know, is where does the President of Iran fit in the whole world of Smurfdom!?!

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Is "SOC" supposed to be "COS" -- namely, moi?

Yes. Sorry for the transpose.

Originally Posted by Skabungus

...................boy, this thread has sure taken an odd turn~

Simple. The probability of wild tangents on a forum grows exponentially
with the number of INTP's present on said forum.

(Rag's addition to the ruleset of internet fora. )

I think this goes down as a first for me. I cant remember ever being likened to a smurf............ever. I am so ignorant on smurfology, I had to follow the link to remember what they were. I wasn't sure if I should be upset or flattered to be on Rag's list of smurf-like beings.

Probably flattered. I mapped you to Nat since he's into environemntal stuff
and nature. For me, said mapping is a logical exercise.

I have thought about it and I'm, well, still confused. But at least, from this ENFP's perspective, It's better than the bulk mail snarking that seems to have hit the forum.

From an ENFP? Extraverted intuition is your primary function, while it's our (INTP)'s secondary one.
Cf. http://typelogic.com/enfp.html

.........So, what I want to know, is where does the President of Iran fit in the whole world of Smurfdom!?!

Gargamel. A lot of us Jonsers don't like all things Mideast. Remember 1979 ?

Originally Posted by K-I-A 67

As I recall, one time you and I entered into a so-called fair minded values discussion. As the discussion progressed, I remember lots snark and insults being sent my way during the discussion to firm up your set of values and positions. The snarks and insults persisted then rose to a point that I started countering your snarks and insults with some counter snarks without the insults. My counter snarks appeared reduce the volume or tone of your snarks, so to speak. I basically ignored your insults. Your insults meant nothing to me. You see, I basically had no internal or external guilt nerve for them to strike, so to speak. As I recall, the discussion got a bit nasty. Bob, you messed up, you established the terms then you broke the terms. Once there was no longer a social standard that I was obligated to adhere with, or a Halo existing over your head, I was basically at liberty to intellectually engage utilizing all my capabilities, so to speak.

I know one thing, this particular ISTP is still scratching his head wondering which values you are primarily progressing or representing every time you bring up or mention our differences in values.

Hmm... At a Myers Briggs level, the expected difference between my INTP and your ISTP would be my my tendency to see forests, against your ability to focus on individual tress. Thus, I'll try to delineate broad patterns. For example, I'll assert different people on these boards argue in different ways. You might focus in on a specific argument, reviewing one specific discussion in significant detail. Frankly, I don't remember the specific discussion you are referencing, while you seem unable to see the pattern I am describing. This reflects different strengths and approaches in how people perceive and interact with the world around them.

If one buys into Myers Briggs at all, one might expect disconnections in different individuals sharing or advocating different forms of ideas. We iNtuitives will keep working on broad patterns. You Sensors will focus on more specific details. Ideally, teams will include both Sensors and iNtuitives, and figure out how to integrate the strengths of both types. Worst case, the two types will look at the same problem from such divergent perspectives that communications is difficult.

But at least we are both Thinkers. We can both write reasonable length articles long enough to fit the scope of the problem under discussion. My immediate problem is individuals who seem to fit the Extrovert Feeler Judger stereotypes. They are about emotion and establishing both personal status and status for their groups. They post one or two short paragraphs which focus on insult and contain few ideas. If one writes a longer piece complex enough to begin to address something as messy as the Iraq situation, one gets complaints about the length of the piece and no attempt to address the ideas involved. Instead, one gets a Feeler's emotional response, not a Thinker's reasoned response.

At this point, attempting to communicate with a E-FJ with reason and thought seems futile. I've tried it. It doesn't work for me. I'll occasionally try to mimic their own methods of communications. I'll write short emotion laden posts too. I just don't do it often or lightly, or expect much in the way of results. Such a posting style of flame and snark and nothing but flame and snark does not interest me as a full time occupation. I try to follow the ancient wisdom, 'Do not feed the troll.'

While Myers - Briggs can illuminate some of the disconnects we see commonly on these boards, some values sets are more cultural. From time to time someone with religious values will propose the Bible contains All Truth and Wisdom. I will respond by reviewing passages advocating genocide, ethnic cleansing, organized rape and slavery. Parts of the Old Testament contain very dated values systems. In reviewing these ancient values, I do not expect to truly convert those dedicated to religious values to respect modern ethics. Those who hold strong values do so at a deep irrational level, and are quite capable of double-thinking themselves around supposedly holy words written in black and white.

And in a similar way, the Red and Blue culture clash values are deep grained set in many people. We can go at each other, hammer and tongs, with as much reason or as much feeling as we'd care to, in a Sensor's detailed examination or from an iNtuitives broad perspective, but seldom do deep held values actually shift.

Thus, I would expect a libertarian with deep held beliefs in the evil of interventionist government to reject ecological science rather than honestly evaluate their base libertarian values. In any given individual there will be base core values which are beyond questioning. Rather than allow such values to be questioned, individuals will fail to be able to perceive the world around them objectively. It is easier for many humans to disregard reality than to question deep held beliefs.

Call me a pessimist, but that's the way I see people behaving. People do not truly examine base values unless and until the world created by such values crashes to the ground in ruins. To a great degree, we are all Cassandra. No matter what any of us say, the rest of us will not hear until it is too late.

Which is why I'm into turning theory. I expect worlds created by entrenched values to crash to the ground in ruins every four score and seven years. Values do shift, not only at an individual level, but at a cultural level. S&H for the first time provided me with a perspective on how such value shifts happen.

At various points, I have tried to advocate Thinker's methods over Feeler's. I have tried to advocate reason over emotion, discussion over flame. I am still biased in that direction. I think it would be a more constructive use of bandwidth and storage. If anyone would care to negotiate temporary cease fires as one topic is discussed or another, I'm game.

But I'm not Spock. If I'm alleged to be Hitler's psychological twin or to be a member of the Inquisition, simply stating that I am not in a calmly factual manner seems not sufficient. Emotion seems necessary in response, or the emotion laden slander and other fallacies will continue indefinitely.

Sometimes the only way to communicate with some people is through emotion and snark. That is as much of themselves as some folk reveal on these boards. At times I'll get ticked off. I'll try to behave myself, but I'll make no claims as to perfection.

Sorry for the INTP diversion, but here the question was raised. I'll note that if we INTPs might divert threads off towards Never Never Land, the E-FJs can bring threads to a halt in a tangle of flame and insults. I could propose that each group might seek to avoid such patterns, but I could also propose that water might start flowing up hill. Neither is apt to happen, not without a lot of pumps or an active moderator.

Originally Posted by Child of Socrates

Regarding posts written by INTPs versus those written by other types:

When I first started posting here, I skipped over a lot of the longer posts because my attention span just wasn't there. I was used to shorter, quicker exchanges through email, chat, IM, and listservs.

Over time, I have trained my SJ brain to slow down and read the longer, more involved posts thoroughly and sometimes repeatedly until the understanding and appreciation clicked in. What an opportunity to teach my mind something new, with all of these INTPs, who see the world so differently than I do!

It can be done. It's hard work, but I think it's worthwhile.

I think it has been a large part of my manner to s-l-o-o-o-o-o-w things down. "Delay is Life" as Lord Salisbury informed.

I am going to recommend Mr. John Ralston Saul's On Equilibrium:Six Qualities of the New Humanism. Even though Mr. Saul is a Great White Northerner and a Progressive he decries, in his matter-of-fact discussion of six basic human qualities — ethics, common sense, intuition, imagination, memory, and reason, the overpowering by the last of all the others in present age.

His argument is made in a way that irks those who would worship the rational sixth of the Children of Men and ignore the other portions. I think your experience (and that of other T4Ters) here will make reading Mr. Saul a more valuable experience. (Or not, as he is a GWNerner!).

Originally Posted by Virgil K. Saari

I think it has been a large part of my manner to s-l-o-o-o-o-o-w things down. "Delay is Life" as Lord Salisbury informed.

I am going to recommend Mr. John Ralston Saul's On Equilibrium:Six Qualities of the New Humanism. Even though Mr. Saul is a Great White Northerner and a Progressive he decries, in his matter-of-fact discussion of six basic human qualities — ethics, common sense, intuition, imagination, memory, and reason, the overpowering by the last of all the others in present age.

His argument is made in a way that irks those who would worship the rational sixth of the Children of Men and ignore the other portions. I think your experience (and that of other T4Ters) here will make reading Mr. Saul a more valuable experience. (Or not, as he is a GWNerner!).

Many thanks, as always, Mr. Saari.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...121802262.html

All Iraqi Groups Blame U.S. Invasion for Discord, Study Shows

By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, December 19, 2007; Page A14

Iraqis of all sectarian and ethnic groups believe that the U.S. military invasion is the primary root of the violent differences among them, and see the departure of "occupying forces" as the key to national reconciliation, according to focus groups conducted for the U.S. military last month.

That is good news, according to a military analysis of the results. At the very least, analysts optimistically concluded, the findings indicate that Iraqis hold some "shared beliefs" that may eventually allow them to surmount the divisions that have led to a civil war.



Conducting the focus groups, in 19 separate sessions organized by outside contractors in five cities, is among the ways in which Multi-National Force-Iraq assesses conditions in the country beyond counting insurgent attacks, casualties and weapons caches. The command, led by Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, devotes more time and resources than any other government or independent entity to measuring various matters, including electricity, satisfaction with trash collection and what Iraqis think it will take for them to get along.

The results are analyzed and presented to Petraeus as part of the daily Battle Update Assessment or BUA (pronounced boo-ah). Some of the news has been unarguably good, including the sharply reduced number of roadside bombings and attacks on civilians. But bad news is often presented with a bright side, such as the focus-group results and a November poll, which found that 25 percent of Baghdad residents were satisfied with their local government and that 15 percent said they had enough fuel for heating and cooking.

The good news? Those numbers were higher than the figures of the previous month (18 percent and 9 percent, respectively).

And Iraqi complaints about matters other than security are seen as progress. Early this year, Maj. Fred Garcia, an MNF-I analyst, said that "a very large percentage of people would answer questions about security by saying 'I don't know.' Now, we get more griping because people feel freer."
ad_icon

Iraqi political reconciliation, quality-of-life issues and the economy are largely the responsibility of the State Department. But the military, to the occasional consternation of U.S. diplomats who feel vastly outnumbered, has its own "mirror agencies" in many areas. Officers in charge of civil-military operations, said senior Petraeus adviser Army Col. William E. Rapp, "can tell you how many markets are open in Baghdad, how many shops, how many banks are open. . . . We have a lot more people" on the ground.

On Iraqi politics, "we have four to six slides almost every morning on 'Where does the Iraqi government stand on de-Baathification legislation?' All these things are embassy things," Rapp said. But Petraeus is interested in "his 'feel' for a situation, and he gets that from a bunch of different data points," he added.

Even though members of the military "understand the limitations" of polling data, Rapp said, "subjective measures" are an important part of the mix. In July, the military signed a contract with Gallup for four public opinion polls a month in Iraq: three nationwide and one in Baghdad. Lincoln Group, which has conducted surveys for the military since shortly after the invasion, received a year-long contract in January to conduct focus groups.

Outside of the military, some of the most widespread polling in Iraq has been done by D3 Systems, a Virginia-based company that maintains offices in each of Iraq's 18 provinces. Its most recent publicly released surveys, conducted in September for several news media organizations, showed the same widespread Iraqi belief voiced by the military's focus groups: that a U.S. departure will make things better. A State Department poll in September 2006 reported a similar finding.

Matthew Warshaw, a senior research manager at D3, said that despite security improvements, polling in Iraq remains difficult. "While violence has gone down, one of the ways it has been achieved is by effectively separating people. That means mobility is limited, with roadblocks by the U.S. and Iraqi military or local militias," Warshaw said in an interview.

Most of the recent survey results he has seen about political reconciliation, Warshaw said, are "more about [Iraqis] reconciling with the United States within their own particular territory, like in Anbar. . . . But it doesn't say anything about how Sunni groups feel about Shiite groups in Baghdad."

Warshaw added: "In Iraq, I just don't hear statements that come from any of the Sunni, Shiite or Kurdish groups that say 'We recognize that we need to share power with the others, that we can't truly dominate.' "

According to a summary report of the focus-group findings obtained by The Washington Post, Iraqis have a number of "shared beliefs" about the current situation that cut across sectarian lines. Participants, in separate groups of men and women, were interviewed in Ramadi, Najaf, Irbil, Abu Ghraib and in Sunni and Shiite neighborhoods in Baghdad. The report does not mention how the participants were selected.

Dated December 2007, the report notes that "the Iraqi government has still made no significant progress toward its fundamental goal of national reconciliation." Asked to describe "the current situation in Iraq to a foreign visitor," some groups focused on positive aspects of the recent security improvements. But "most would describe the negative elements of life in Iraq beginning with the 'U.S. occupation' in March 2003," the report says.

Some participants also blamed Iranian meddling for Iraq's problems. While the United States was said to want to control Iraq's oil, Iran was seen as seeking to extend its political and religious agendas.

Few mentioned Saddam Hussein as a cause of their problems, which the report described as an important finding implying that "the current strife in Iraq seems to have totally eclipsed any agonies or grievances many Iraqis would have incurred from the past regime, which lasted for nearly four decades -- as opposed to the current conflict, which has lasted for five years."

Overall, the report said that "these findings may be expected to conclude that national reconciliation is neither anticipated nor possible. In reality, this survey provides very strong evidence that the opposite is true." A sense of "optimistic possibility permeated all focus groups . . . and far more commonalities than differences are found among these seemingly diverse groups of Iraqis."