digg

Join DiggAbout

Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!

No Safe Way for U.S. to Leave Iraq, Experts Warn

cnn.com — Pulling U.S. forces from Iraq could trigger catastrophe, CNN analysts and other observers warn, affecting not just Iraq but its neighbors in the Middle East, with far-reaching global implications. Supporters of al Qaeda could develop an international hub of terror from which to threaten the West. And a likely civil war could draw in other countries

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • jetta421, on 10/12/2007, -8/+7Where were these experts in the news last week? Funny how this story pops up out of the blue the day after the spending bill was vetoed...conspiracy? hmmmm.
    • ralphie81, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7"Where were these experts..?"

      Probably conducting their research so they'd have a story to write when Bush inevitably signed the veto.

      Also a conspiracy is how this top story on CNN submitted 3 hrs ago only has 7 diggs while a mock video of Bush submitted an hour ago ("A Look Back at the “Mission” We’ve “Accomplished”") has 253. Ridiculous.
    • Glynth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11Where were they? Try SHOUTING THIS FROM THE ROOFTOPS (metaphorically). This isn't new news. You just don't see people talking about it much. Expect this story to be buried, as well.

      You want "conspiracy?" Try delaying the bill for 5+ days (more than that if you look at vacations taken) so that it arrives at the White House on the anniversary of the "Mission Accomplished" speech (which itself has been twisted to utter ridiculousness - the Pres never even uttered that phrase) and you can make a propaganda statement about it.
  • jdfoxmd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9I think if anything is a conspiracy, it is the media 's refusal to cover more stories like these. Not everyone is ready to give up in Iraq like many politicians would like us to. Like the article said everyone wants our troops home, but it is foolish to do so without first bringing some sort of peace to the country.
    • truspector, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7You do realize that compared to now, it was relatively peaceful before we invaded.
    • foamweapons, on 10/12/2007, -5/+4Iraq was peaceful, too bad Youtube wasn't popular back then... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bC4EJ8Jlck0

      America is a destabilizing force in Iraq. ***** "experts" got us into the war, when it was obvious to the U.N., almost all of Europe and former intelligence officials that Iraq had no WMD.

      Now CNN's "experts" say we should stay there indefinitely. For what? 80% of Iraqis want us to leave. The majority of attacks on the Iraqi Army are because Iraqis see their army as an arm of the U.S. government... and since 60% of Iraqis support attacks on U.S. troops, they support attacks on Iraqis who 'help the occupiers.' What's left to accomplish? Are more American troops patrolling the streets going to stop average Iraqis from being against America occupying their country? No... so unless we want to create more insurgents and create more chaos, we should leave immediately.
    • ralphie81, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@truspector

      You're right, and Germany was relatively peaceful in 1938 compared to 1944.
  • mcscooter, on 10/12/2007, -5/+3Just who are "CNN analysts and other observers" . I'm an observer. So is everyone else on this site. There's a difference between CNN reporting and journalism. Opinion and Fact.




    • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9It's under political opinion. That said, Peter Bergen probably knows more about the Middle East than most of Digg put together.

      http://www.peterbergen.com/bergen/
      Peter Bergen has traveled to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, and Indonesia to learn about Osama bin Laden and his followers. In his newest book: The Osama bin Laden I Know: An Oral History of al Qaeda's Leader he provides a unprecedented portrait of the world's most wanted man.
    • foamweapons, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2And you can see military soldiers "embedding him" in the background of the picture about him. He's never went to Iraq as an independent journalist.

      Naomi Klein is a way better expert, she's been in Iraq, almost got killed there as an independent journalist, and she does a way better analysis...
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LbsSFMXUong
      http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1227-24.htm
  • nace33, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7The media has lost so much credibility with me. All they care about is ratings. Quality journalism is fading away as is my trust for anything CNN says.
  • tennagon18, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10Interesting a topic early on Digg about Bush's veto signature makes it to the front page submitted in 13 hours this submitted as of now 18 hours ago has only 17 diggs so far? Is the Digg majority politically far left? Hmmmmmmmmm....yes!
    • SpaceMonkeyZero, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Far left with a crazy Bury Brigade of 20000 off shore help for only 0.5 cents a bury!
    • swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Far left? No. Left? Yes! Is the majority of the U.S population leaning to the left? Also yes. Stop whining just because your radical war-mongering has fallen out of fashion.
  • jefferyt, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5I read this this morning. I was a little surprised that it wasn't on digg's front page. Then again maybe not.

    I am not a huge Bush supporter. Heck, I am not really much of a politician supporter. However, the fact that this doesn't make digg's front page helps me take the rest of the strange buried articles a little bit better.

    Wonder where the "Fox is in bed with the Republicans" crowd is.
    • AdmiralAdama, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5Digg's front page is normally controlled by leftists and truthers. Not that there's anything wrong with it.
  • republicker, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1im pretty sure they can just fly out the same way they came in.
  • kenvsryu, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2Get Saddam's dna. Clone. Place back in power.
  • swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3FTA: "Analysts fear a U.S. withdrawal could lead to a regional conflict along Sunni-Shiite lines."

    These are probably the same analysts who said invading Iraq *wouldn't* lead to a regional conflict along Sunni-Shiite lines. And how the ***** can withdrawal "lead to" that, when its already happening???
    • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Regional means beyond Iraqis.
    • swrostmore, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You mean like across the border attacks by and towards Iran and Turkey?
  • Reclinatron, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Wait, we can't leave because it is going to cause more terrorism? This is FUD. (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt)

    We are there and global terrorism is up almost 29%.(1) We shouldn't be attempting an occupation of a country in a civil war. This article is filled with a bunch of what ifs based off of the opinion of a couple political analysts by a news company that didn't bother to investigate the ramifications of the war before it started. If they failed then, why should I believe them now? Why rely on these "analysts" when you can read primary sources?

    News flash for everyone. These terrorists are operating in Pakistan. "In Pakistan, the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, the FATA of Pakistan, have become safe haven for al-Qaida terrorists and other extremist insurgents since the fall of the Taliban in December 2001. Despite Pakistan's effort to eliminate threats and to establish effective governance in the FATA, these tribal areas continue to be terrorist safe havens and sources of instability for Pakistan and its neighbors."(1)

    They don't need Iraq to be able to operate freely. Terrorist already do so in Pakistan. Iraq isn't stable with all our troops there. I fail to see how removing them somehow can create more instability when there isn't any to begin with. What it does do is keeps our troops from dying and stops us from bankrupting our country economically and politically.

    (1) http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/rm/07/83999.htm

    "QUESTION: Yeah. Can I just -- I have another numbers question, and that is -- and then I have another one. Why did you choose to say there was a 25 percent increase in the number of attacks when, in fact, the percentage is slightly higher than that -- almost 29 percent?

    MR. TRAVERS: You will have slightly different numbers here in the book because the information cutoff -- I mean, these numbers change. As you'll find out, the '05 numbers that we have are different than the '05 numbers that were in country reports. I don't know what you've got there exactly. "
  • geekee, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1This story is DOA. Digg won't let people think for themselves. They just spoon feed them propaganda,
  • simplejoe79, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Not surprising
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.