What is Digg?Warning: The Content in this Article May be Inaccurate
Readers have reported that this story contains information that may not be accurate.71 Comments
- EckerNet, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11I'm fairly certain 100% of the US wants to leave right now...but at the same time quite a few of them understand the consequences of doing that.
- deesnutz, on 10/12/2007, -5/+12George W. Bush to the Iraqis ...
We will give your democracy at any cost, even if it kills you.
Iraq is today's Vietnam.
http://www.democratgiftshop.com/cgi-bin/store/store.cgi/1585028665/left/812511 - ichbinladen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Seems that Iraqis and Americans have something in common after all.
- flernk, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5But I bet you read Drudge daily.
- briantech, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Will develop? A terrorist state has already developed. *Because* of the war in Iraq. So what would you suggest, keep doing what we're doing and grow the terrorist state even bigger?
I love how the convservative republicans cause huge global problems, and then blame democrats for wanting to at least stop it from getting worse.
"What?! Leave it in the state we put it in? No! We must push on with our heads in the sand repeating the same mistakes we've done for the last 6 years. After all, it hasn't worked yet, so we better keep doing it." - craig870, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5@nixfu
Huh? - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -8/+12"...the consequences of doing that."
Which are? Iraq is already in a state of civil war. We're making more enemies every day.
We are occupying a sovereign nation against the will of its people. Why are we so surprised they're pissed at us? - trenchcoat, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7A thinkprogress link on the frontpage. I'm shocked...not really.
- monkeyrun, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5yeah.. and bring some oil on your way out, thanks.
Funny thing .. They did not ask for help in the first place. - finite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Unfortunately some people actually DO like going to war: these people are called war profiteers and they're all up in and around certain public offices lately.
There are also a lot people who inexplicably love war even though they don't directly make any money on it. They're typically not clever enough to be in or around public office, but you can often find them mouthing off in the low-threshold gutters of the TV and internet. - BigEazy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Holy crap, Iraqi's dont want the United States Military occupying their country?!?! Somebody deserves a lollipop for discovering this.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+6Let me guess what the headline from the other side of the table will be...
"New Poll: 71 Percent Of Iraqis Want U.S. Forces To Stay For At Least A Year Longer"
Yeah... suuuuure...
Who to trust with your news... Who - to - trust... - briantech, on 10/12/2007, -6/+10Well thats the wonderful thing about studies. They poll entire population-representative samples of people, as opposed to the 3 or 4 people you personally met once.
- donjaime, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Then why did the US invade in the first place? Just to destroy infrastructure and destabilize the country... then leave them at the mercy of armed crazy people? I thought the "official stance" (after the WMD rubbish) was to bring Democracy to the region.
How can the average Iraqi help his or herself? Remember the majority aren't armed or are willing to participate in the violence.
The fact of the matter is, the invasion has led to instability in Iraq. It is the responsibility of the US to see it through, since they were the ones who removed Saddam (who was a tyrant, but at least kept some order) and in effect destabilized the country.
There is an oportunity in Iraq to setup a Democracy that could potentially be an example for other Islamic nations to follow. My view on the matter is that the US should not have invaded if they weren't prepared to see it through. Since they did invade, they should be responsible enough to finish what they started and instill a working, stable Democracy. - mozzep, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Too bad they don't live in a democratic nation. If they did, then the majority opinion might actually mean something. Oh wait, it doesn't mean much in the US either unless Bush agrees with it.
- djbruker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Maybe Iraqis would be better off if they could fend for themselves, and try to establish order. As it is now, you can't be a visible armed civilian in Iraq because the American troops will cut you down. Just drive too fast in the wrong direction and you, your pregnant wife, grandma and kids have their flesh shredded by 50cal machine gun fire.
Why does this happen? American troops necessarily have a low threshold and low tolerance for anything threatening in Iraq, because the civilian leadership: Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld, have demonstrated a criminal level of incompetence and negligence in commanding the US military. American troops are constantly on their heels instead of in preferrable offensive roles, as they face an unrelenting threat of IEDs all day every day. The pentagon war plans designed by professionals were scrapped for ***** Rumsfeld's disasterous plans: don't worry about the aftermath, we'll be greeted as liberators. ***** incompetent criminal *****.
Both starting a war on false pretences and managing a war with this level of incompetence and irresponsiblity are crimes in themselves. Every American soldier and Iraqi civilian who dies there is another charge of manslaughter for Bush & Cheney. - briantech, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Seriously. If 75% of americans are sick of this war -- and all we have to endure is watching it on TV every day -- is it really surprising that the people living IN THE WAR ZONE are sick of it as well...
- finite, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@synaesthesia: but what if you continue drinking and staggering around ***** ***** up, for years, killing your "friend"'s countrymen, all the while just making the mess worse, all the while insisting that you're just trying to clean it up and make things better? How long should your "friend" have to tolerate it?
Withdrawling troops now *will* have a positive impact, in that it will no longer be US soldiers who are directly making things worse there everyday.
Things there after our withdrawl will still be quite bad, and it will still be the USA's fault its such a mess, but at least it would finally be our fault in the _past tense_.
In other words, lets stop with the ongoing wrongdoings and whatnot, you know what I'm saying? - cougar618, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4This, to me seems like a reasonable request. In that year, we should do something to help the Kurds out. Also, I think the violence would go down significantly if we could gain support from other Islamic countries. Can you really blame them for not wanting the US there? After all, this is no different than when England was here in the US...
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Yeah it's become the mothership lately hasn't it.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9Wake up.
There is no stability in Iraq, social or political. A few more years of US presence is not going to change that. In fact, it would almost certainly make it worse. The second we withdraw, be it tomorrow or ten years from now, Iraq will be overrun, by Iran or what remains of the Taliban or whoever. It will remain one of the hugest ***** in American history. - tehbishop, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"...That's the point. The average Iraqi can help his or herself by joining the police force, the military etc. They can also help by being a voice for democracy."
I guess they'd rather be alive than free, the poor dumb bastards ... - steinbeckgirl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2BigRaRay- I feel sorry for your kids, their daddy is an idiot who is probably making sure they grow up hating too. You are the one who always sounds so angry!!! We serve our country, we save it from people like you
- Sojobo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2BigBaRay: "Your anger consumes you"
BigBaRay: "You cowardly *****"
Seems to me as though you are the one consumed by anger my friend. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Thats the whole problem with this liberal vs conservative *****. They spin it both ways because it can be and both sides think they are more and more superior than the other side.
We will never truely be ok until these idiots on both sides stop being so self serving and pridefull with having to be right all the time. Without the degradation of morals with what some liberal sex nympho comes up with and tries to give it "rights" or the decline of personal privacy and ability to make a living to have a home with the piggish money hog anti-competitive practices of the bloated conservatives. There is no hope of that though, is there?
I have truely just had it with both of these total know-it-all children who have absolutely no clue what so ever! - donjaime, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4Iraq is already in what most would call a Civil War. What do people think will happen if the US withdraws now?
Peace will not magically sprout itself. The US needs to stay the course until some stability is reached in Iraq. It would be incredibly irresponsible to pull out before then. Doing so would give a free pass for the militias and armed radicals to fight it out... paving the way for another rogue state.
Whether or not you agreed with going into Iraq in the first place is not the issue. Its whether or not you are naive enough to believe Iraq can survive right now without the troops acting as peace keepers. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2spengy
we did NOT get any oil, but that is because "we" are not connected.. this wasnt an oil grab for the american people, it was an oil grab for american oil companies, but we will still have to pay market prices for oil and gas. DOnt belive me? look in the iraq constitution, one of the first admendments we made them make, was that the oil contracts can not be broken, ever.. unlike the us constittuion if enough agree it can be changed, with the iraq, the oil contracts are perminate. - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2". . . won't help themselves"
I just don't understand that comment. Have you been to Iraq? Do you know any Iraqi's who have endured this war? Do you know any soldiers who have fought in this war? Have you asked them to talk about their experiences?
Did you see what the US did in Abu Ghraib (and I _know_ soliders who said they put innocent men in that detention camp)? Did you see what we did to Fallujah (a city of 250,000 turned to rubble - check out www.conceptionmedia.net)? Did you read about Haditha? Did you know that many of our soldiers don't want to be in Iraq? They've been stop lossed. They've been recalled to service. Many have been back too or three times. Many of our soldiers are tired of the war and they want to come home.
I think asking us to leave is the Iraqi's "helping themselves". - Zenithan, on 10/12/2007, -7/+9Yes, the Democrats want terrorism to happen. They all want America to be attacked, and want to slowly erode away at the nation until there is nothing left.
"Because anyone who doesn't agree with you hates America." -Fundamentalist Republican - briantech, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6People not liking war is propaganda now? I thought that was rather common sense.
Ah, wait, something conservatives tend to have very little of...
You conservatives love it so much, why don't you all go over there and fight. Take your soccer playing kid with you, I'm sure he'll love it as well. - xXShadowstormXx, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6"New Poll: 71 Percent Of Iraqis Want U.S. Forces To Withdraw Within A Year"
No $H!T sherlock. It's not like people LIKE going to war. It sucks. War sucks. - steinbeckgirl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Pabster- I don't think you have any room calling others an idiot.
I can think of some things that are similiar in Vietnam and Iraq. For instance, Vietnam had natural resources we wanted, so does Iraq. Dissent was growing in America over Vietnam, as is with Iraq. Nixon wiretapped American citizens without merit, so does Bush. Both claimed it was for national security, except when Nixon to it the regular Joe's, there was a public outcry. That is why FISA was created, so that way no President, even in times in war, even with the threat of terrorism, could have unchecked power to abuse. They promised the American people in 1978 the the government must demonstrate to the courts that it has probable cause that is relevent to a crime or related to a threat from a foreign power. Any questions?
Ps. You can thank Sen Hillary Clinton for making sure our soldiers recieved their pay and benefits swift and prompt. Look it up, I'm not going to do all your thinking for you. - Burritovision, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1This figure seems accurate. Some 72% of US Soldiers want us to end the war in 2006.
- account, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3The Iraq war is much different from the Vietnam war. In the Vietnam war, our Ally was attacked and we went to help them out. In Iraq we wanted to remove Saddam from power, much like he removed the UN's weapon inspectors.
- loljews, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The actual poll comes from the PIPA, pipa.org. The poll in question has been out for awhile, I guess because it's 1 month away from the election, they cite it now. But the PIPA is a nonpartisan group and they do good work.
- ilyawh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1because of course, they must LOVE being occupied by a foreign nation, having their oil stolen and being shot at. the poll MUST be wrong!
- dagonweb, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2This isn't a popularity contest. They are there to occupy, repress and teach them sand ***** a lesson and that is what they will do.
Disgusting. - craig870, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2"How can the average Iraqi help his or herself? Remember the majority aren't armed or are willing to participate in the violence."
That's the point. The average Iraqi can help his or herself by joining the police force, the military etc. They can also help by being a voice for democracy. The point is that it cannot be forced upon them. They have to want it and fight for it. If they know of an extremist or extremist activity, report it. I am not debating whether the invasion led to instability because the answer is pretty obvious. Until the Iraqis stand together and say enough is enought to the extremist then there is no opportunity. - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1The Iraqi's didn't go to war. We attacked them.
- spengy, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3Iraq is a mess. Iraq will be a mess in the future. We've got ourselves into a very sticky situation. Whether bush lied or had 'bad intelligence,' I'm note sure.
We withdraw immediately: some crackpot radical leader rises to dictatorship.
We withdraw later: some crackpot radical leader rises to dictatorship.
Don't ask me what to do, this sucks. - ZaZen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually if any of you who said this was biased and leaning towards the left looked at the actual methodology and questionnare you would see that its neither and that they pooled a large enough population of the people to make the findings rather generalizable to the whole country. They also asked a number of others questions so please before marking this as innacurate please read the actual data. Here is the actual pdf link showing there methodogoly and findings (http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/sep06/Iraq_Sep06_quaire.pdf)
- GlargTheKelfn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1no one wants to be occupied by a foreign force. no one, no where. why the hell would anyone think different? would you want un troops on the street enforcing order?
***** no, you'd do everything you could to get them out of your country. uk learned this in india, soviets in afganistan, us in viet nam. but we are doing it again.
because winning the war in iraq was never the objective. the objective was to turn the us form a free and open society to a police state controlled by a single party. and it's working like a charm. - fricken4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Tottally ignorant to presume that these people don't want to help themselves.
- fricken4, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1A terrorist State is unlikely to develop in Iraq. A new Poll Showed well over 90% of Iraqis do not want Al quaeda in Iraq- that's all Shiites and the Majority of Sunnis. Irregardless, a Civil war is already in progress. Since the American Invasion opened Pandora's Box, events will play themselves out in Iraq regardless of the American military Presence.
But American's aren't going to leave until they've established a compliant client regime, whether it is democratic or not. - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0We do _not_ need to stay the course.
If you want to stay in Iraq and make things better, you need a radically different strategy because this one utterly sucks. - c130commnav, on 10/12/2007, -6/+6I don't know who they polled but it seems like BS to me, most the iraqis I had contact with where happy with what we where doing. Don't get me wrong no one WANTS to be there, no one WANTS to be in war, but its just reality.
- fricken4, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Americans Aren't allowed to Help the Kurds out. The Kurds want an independent nation, and if they create one then the Turkish kurds will want to Join too.
In Turkey, like in Iraq, the Kurds are bitterly oppressed- it's a crime to even acknowledge their existence.
Keep in mind that the USA payed Turkey nearly 30 billion dollars for the right to stage their forces there prior to the invasion - nfulton, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0So . . .you were armed and you were talking to Iraqi's and they said they were glad to see you.
Smart Iraqi's.
Which is not to say that most Iraqi's _hate_ US soldiers. They don't. But the truth is there are too few soldiers to bring peace to the nation. If you had 500,000 US soldiers there, and they were going to stay for 10 years, and you had a _massive_ relief and investment program like we did for Germany/Japan . . . there would be hope of making the place paradise because there would be enough "law and order" to keep the peace. We could get around to providing enough food for the kids to eat. Enough money to rebuild the water, electrical plants, etc.
But some idiot decided we could do the unnecesary war of aggression war on a budget . . . . and that bad judgement and subsequent mismanagement has cost many, many Iraqi lives.
Right now the US military is "just another of the forces on the ground in Iraq". The Shia militias, the Sunni militias, the Kurdish militias, the "Iraq Army" and 138,000 or so US servicemen.
If one of those armies leaves, that's fewer people to shoot guns. . . . 138,000 US soldiers are just not going to cut it. We should get out and we (and the Iraqi's) should move on to some kind of less-gun oriented solution. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1In Iraq we wanted to remove Saddam from power, much like he removed the UN's weapon inspectors.
lol the weapoins inspectors, where there until a weak before we bombed..
and all of them said, even witht eh times saddam played games with them, now way did he have WMDs
scott ritter a republican war hawk and weapons inspector was swift boated for saying iraq had no wmds
and the difference between vietnam and iraq, is veitnam was a proixy war with the russians, so we wouldnt have to get into a nuclear war.. much like aphghanistan I, where as iraq, we simply choose to remove a former ally from power once we lost interest in his usefulness. - doddilus, on 10/12/2007, -6/+5All polls are full of *****. The maker can easily phrase the question to get the desired response, and unless you poll 100% of the population, it is going to be inaccurate.
-
Show 51 - 71 of 71 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