What is Digg?145 Comments
- tybris, on 01/06/2008, -12/+62ter·ror·ist (tĕr'ər-ĭst)
1 Person who thinks it is ok to kill people for his cause. - inactive, on 01/06/2008, -2/+39Why do people treat this like a game? Peoples lives are being lost for what? Politics and religion? The world is mad.
- quakerorts, on 01/06/2008, -9/+45Damn! Seems like the Republican candidates are all self-destructing. It's my favorite comedy show!
- daoism, on 01/06/2008, -5/+20McCain states at the end of the clip: “What if Jordan falls? What if there’s another war with Israel? What if Egypt..? There’s tremendous upheaval in this part of the world. So it depends on our national security threats and our needs to meet them.”
EXCUSE ME Senator, but the last I checked, there’s tremendous upheaval elsewhere not just the middle east. Myanmar, Darfur, Somalia, Kenya, Colombia just to name a few… so why the hell is the US only focused on Iraq? Is it because these other places don’t have oil? Besides you’re speaking in WHAT IF’s how can you justify occupying Iraq for another 100 years ‘just in case’ the middle east falls? The US is viewed as an occupier and a bully. Our presence there incenses Muslims extremists and even local citizens, so how can you honestly say that being there improves our national security? Could it be you’re old and senile and need to leave your office and go to a rest home? - SouthsideIrish, on 01/06/2008, -7/+20He is one sick puppy, which is what I have always believed.
- inactive, on 01/06/2008, -4/+16Does he think that american taxpayers want to fund trillions of dollars going overseas to nation build (or give stability to the region)? None of these wars have anything to do with the U.S. They've got their own nation co-op that uses diplomacy to stop wars, impending wars, harboring of terrorists, nukes, etc. between nations. We are on the other side of the god damn planet and McCain thinks troop deaths are all we care about...Give me a break.
- TWGMichael, on 01/07/2008, -2/+14It costs US taxpayers 1 billion dollars a week to keep troops in Iraq. It costs 1 trillion dollars a year to maintain over 500,000 US troops stationed around the world occupying allies like Germany and Japan. This is the American Empire. How can we afford to keep dumping money on the world in the form of military bases while New Orleans drowns, California burns and 12 million illegal immigrants pour across our borders? Bring those troops home. Bring that money home.
- FullmetalGinta, on 01/06/2008, -6/+15Wow. He could have hus own sitcom. "The stupidest political phrases, sayings and or speaches"
- hoppdawg, on 01/06/2008, -7/+16I used to love McCain, but he's gone off the ***** deep end.
- thevelvetsun, on 01/06/2008, -5/+12McCain: "As long as there are no consequences to US Imperialism, I don't see why we shouldn't continue to do it. I mean, as long as our soldiers aren't dying, who cares about the falling dollar? The whole world still loves us."
- quaxon, on 01/07/2008, -4/+11are you guys ***** kidding me? Mccain never stood for anything other than corporate interests and money. Does the keating 5 mean anything to you?
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -0/+6You're totally right, he's talking about what-ifs like it's OUR responsibility. He acts like other countries have no control over anything. Give me a break, when one country has problems, it effects the surrounding countries......not the US on the other side of the world.
- briguymaine, on 01/06/2008, -2/+8I'd love to know how many of the people on Digg that throw around the term "neocon" actually knows what it means. It's a catchy phrase that everyone is using lately. Quick go look it up on Wikipedia. Now someone copy and paste the definition into a reply. Feel free to digg me down at point in the process.
- spaceman84, on 01/06/2008, -2/+8Republicans seem to ***** love him in New Hampshire.
- lickfire, on 01/07/2008, -2/+6Wait a minute. Wow, guys get your facts right before commenting. When he says, "where the Iraqis are doing the fighting and dying", he's talking about the Iraqi police, not our people vs, their people. Look I'm no fan of the war nor a fan of Cain by a long shot, but if your looking to make good arguments stop miss-quoting ever story that comes out.
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -1/+5Since when has the media ever cared about Iraqis dying? The 60 women who have been found decapitated and dumped for "offending Allah", this year in Iraq has never been covered by the mainstream media. The left only care about Iraqis being killed if it is by the bullet or bomb of an American so why do they act so self righteous when McCain says this?
- jdorenbush, on 01/07/2008, -2/+6Buried for misleading title. Thats not how McCain said it. You make it sound like that is directly what he said.
The reason he wants to stay in Iraq is the same reason we are in other countries. Iraq has resources we need. We have an interest in that country. Besides if we let it go it would come under rule from some other crazy dictator or something.
Don't get me wrong. I want our troops out of there, but at the same time I understand McCain's position. Its a tough call and you have to look at the positives and negatives of each decision that is made in regards to Iraq and the "war". However its annoying when people fanboy the anti-McCain crap. Do something useful instead spamming Digg.com with this stuff over and over and over again. - xSEED, on 01/07/2008, -0/+4and the american empire expands
- steveoco, on 01/07/2008, -1/+5Please refrain from making titles that look like quotes. Something like McCain is a dick head would be more fitting.
These pseudo quote titles are misleading regardless of their content. - hddigger, on 01/07/2008, -6/+10Ok, the title is ridiculously incorrect. He just says that as long as americans are safe they can stay in Iraq as long as necessary. It's a typical digg submission title spun to get attention. There's nothing he says in this video that's new, and that we haven't already heard from him.
- Radan, on 01/07/2008, -1/+5When I first read the title my first though was that this would yet again another story where Digg shows it's remarkable ability to make everything sound like it's the end of the world as we know it. However, this time that's hardly the case. He literally says straight out and even clarifies it, that he indeed thinks that the US troops may stay in Iraq as long as "the Iraqis are doing all the fighting and dying." The title is sadly correct.
- rda1441, on 01/07/2008, -1/+5You're wrong on a number of accounts. Republicans expect a president to be responsible and advance what's better for his/her people. I'm not looking to vote for a president who's interested in the welfare of people oceans away...it's their job to look after themselves.
It's not wrong for Americans to put Americans first, or Brits to put Brits first, or.... on and on.
The quicker we dump this global community bs the better. - obxjdt, on 01/07/2008, -1/+4The headline is inaccurate, and takes his words out of context! When he says " ...if the Iraqis fight and die...." He's talking about the U.S. playing a supporting role as needed, and not fighting the war for them.
You should actually watch the video with your speakers on, and turned up to an audible level..... - mOdQuArK, on 01/07/2008, -1/+4I thought the classic definition was a person who uses terror to achieve political goals.
- Hananda, on 01/07/2008, -1/+4"Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran".
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -0/+3My COD4 death to kill ratio is 3.2
- rft3rd, on 01/07/2008, -2/+5His statements are grossly blown out of proportion. What he IS SAYING is that the American people wont care if its Iraqi's dieing as long as its not our boys. People wake up. non of us cared before the invasion if Iraqi's were killing them selves. We didn't care about the conditions in Kosovo or Bosnia. We didn't care until our boys started getting killed. Is there an outcry for our soldiers to come home from Germany? NOPE.
The statement was actually the voice of Americans. Something our government is supposed to be all about any way. - Killian14, on 01/07/2008, -3/+6Manipulative? Look at the title of this entry! It makes it seem like McCain was saying that we can stay in Iraq as long as Iraqis are dying as oppose to not dying. A more objective, accurate title would say "McCain: As long as americans are not dying, we can stay in Iraq." THAT was essentially what he was saying. What makes Digg any better than MSM when you manipulte the facts as much as they do? I do not support McCain, I'm partial towards Obama, but I support factual depections of the candidates.
- Sogui, on 01/07/2008, -4/+7I think people hate McCain because he calls em like he sees em.
Diggers call him insane because the situation is insane. Everything he said is absolutely true, as soon as US troops stop dying and it's the fight is in the Iraqis ballpark... then Americans will be content with the situation.
McCain cuts through the ***** and gets straight down to the dirty details, he knows we're going to be in Iraq for a long time and he knows America won't be happy until AMERICAN troops are safe. He just says it in such a blunt way that even Diggers are reeling.
But this is why he's popular and has a reputation as a maverick, he is "refreshing" to many voters because he isn't trying to pander to anyone or say what will get him the most votes.
I think the knee-jerk style judgment of the internet on John McCain has led to a serious mis-perception of what he stands for. His style is very pragmatic, people love Dr. No because he votes on principle, people love McCain because he votes on what is the most realistic option for improving America.
You'll find me voting for Obama this November, but that doesn't mean I don't respect John McCain for really breaking the mold of typical "smile and say the right words" politician. - LeeSoong, on 01/07/2008, -0/+3South Korea and North Korea will Unite some time in the future,
just like Germany did - because it makes sense to have 1 country, not
two half countries.
If the USA wants to close Korean bases - that's great for America. Save money!
Koreans can defend themselves, negotiate diplomatically, and still purchase
American military equipment, weapons, etc - as needed. Buying the type of equipment the USA supplies right now at their own expense...
The South Korean economy is going strong, and is a benefit to the USA.
Korea supplies the USA with many electronic components, memory chips, cars, etc - all useful to the USA. - Nick22, on 01/07/2008, -2/+4why do people always insist on getting dugged down?
- richmessenger, on 01/07/2008, -0/+2It's not what he should say but it's what he means.
- Vigilo, on 01/07/2008, -1/+3Ron Paul when he runs as an independant and if he isn't on the ballot i'll write his name in. I sure as hell won't have a second choice its RP or no one.
- heystoopid, on 01/07/2008, -1/+3the man's a total fruit loop ! , and they gave him a medal for what reason again other then sucking up to admiral daddy fleet commander ?
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -3/+5McCain's viewpoint will, almost by definition, bring about the end of the American power structure, dumbass
- vornan19, on 01/07/2008, -1/+3I, for one, do not want more Military Bases built in other countries. If we (Americans) are not wanted we should not ignore the sentiment of some other country and build a ***** base, PERIOD.
- sa7ouri, on 01/07/2008, -0/+2"as the modern world's economy is virtually built upon and relies on that oil, we certainly better be concerned who controls it, at least until we can reduce our dependency on that oil."
So if oil was concentrated more in North America, then you would think it's ok for other countries to try and control the US so that they can control the oil? And would it be ok if, during that process, hundreds of thousands of innocent Americans perished so that oil doesn't fall in the hands of the "bad people"?
Your argument is ignorant and selfish. Thankfully there seems to be less and less of you in America every day. Your "control" of Middle Eastern countries for the sake of oil is killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people, injuring even more, and driving many people into fundamentalism against America. And why did this start? Why did the US invade Iraq? To keep the oil away from Islamic extremists? Saddam had that under control much more than the US has 5 years into the war.
Please wake up and think rationally. - inactive, on 01/07/2008, -1/+3Great, lets turn government policy over to Merriam-Webster!!!
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -1/+3Another GOP *****-wad! Vote for Dr. No!
- tidu, on 01/07/2008, -0/+2true. I remember him being at least a semi-respectable candidate in the debates, against torture, etc. but now since he realized he's losing, he's jumping on the neocon bandwagon
- TheSpook, on 01/07/2008, -0/+2The next election is pretty much a repeat of the last presidential election - vote for the lesser evil. My candidate of choice is pretty much dead in the water, so I now have to decide which of the future nominees will be worse and vote for the other. I'd take McCain over Huckabee.
- jiggawhat, on 01/07/2008, -1/+3You know, I can understand why people don't type out whole words on a cell phone when they're sending a short message to a friend. But come on, this is a forum and you're trying to make a point about intelligence.
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -0/+2You're getting banned so fast you have to make a new account every few days?
- ZenMojo, on 01/07/2008, -1/+3He's been drinking the Kool-Aid since 2002.... By 2009 he'll be supporting torture.
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -2/+4OFN. He said this forever ago and didnt back down from it. I'll try another 3 letter acronym for $500 Alex, BFD. He's right, we have bases all over the world. Should I be more outraged that he wants the Iraqis to fight their own war? Or is it that he put in in a non-PC way by saying "as long as it's iraqis dying, we can stay in iraq". please enlighten me
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -2/+4McCain is Insane.
- inactive, on 01/07/2008, -0/+2Ha! And what shall we call Senator B. Hussein Obama? How about coke snorting, pandering, race bating, islo-fascist terrorist who actively preys on liberal guilt of his white constituency. That'll do for starters.
- Sornos, on 01/07/2008, -0/+2I'm referring to Tyrbris' definition of terrorism. It does not state anything about location.
- causeitsme, on 01/07/2008, -3/+5Uhmm, were the Founding Fathers actually IN Britain doing the killing or were they on their own soil? I think there is a vast difference here and you implying otherwise is crazy.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 141 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is