digg

Join DiggAbout

Digg Townhall Tonight!
Tune into the live Digg townhall tonight at 5:00pm PST/8:00pm EST.

Iraq's Head Says They Can Keep Country Secure - So Why Are We Frick'n There

cbsnews.com — "Iraq's prime minister said that the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in the country when American troops leave "any time they want," though he acknowledged the forces need further weapons and training." It's call a Democracy. The head of the elected Democratic State has spoken. So now what Mr. Bush... explain it to me.

show profanity settings
expand all
  • Anrkist, on 10/11/2007, -3/+26because every other day theres a story about how they are asking us to stay in the country.... IM SO CONFUSED!
    • zaibatsu, on 10/11/2007, -6/+6Well the leader of the country has spoken... So I would trust his words and not our administrations.
      • obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+9I thought al-Maliki was supposed to be a puppet of our government. Does he ever make a statement that doesn't come from inside the White House? Is he breaking from our wishes here? I'm also confused.
        • mdhauke, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Because if you believe him, there is some ocean front property in NM I want to see you
      • Glugory, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4Oh please! If we left, the Iraqi government would fall before you could say DURKA DURKA! Their entire government is either corrupt or incompetent. This goes for their military. One day a certain soldier might be working with us, the next day he's setting up a road side bomb to kill us. You're an idiot if you think that country can defend itself.
        • nondescrypt, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2the only thing that country needs to defend itself against is the ***** American troops who are shooting up their women & children daily, it can't get any worse, so get the ***** out ! ( oh yeah, & on the way out & give them back their 21 trillion in oil money, that might help the people just a little)
        • Glugory, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4@nondescrypt
          Yeah, it's not like there isn't that whole CIVIL ***** WAR thing going on over there. Yeah, it's JUST US killing Iraqis. They're not killing each other at all! Those suicide bombings in markets and *****? Those aren't Iraqis. Those are American troops because we're the ONLY ones killing people! Seriously nondescrypt, you're a ***** moron.
        • obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@Glugory, haven't they been telling us there isn't a civil war going on? I'm sure I heard that a few times.
      • Jerrellw, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Spoken? I did not hear him ask us to leave. I heard "We can protect ourselves when the Americans (please don't leave)...we still need weapons (please don't leave)...and training (please don't leave)."
    • hfactor, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6No, the answer is: because he lies. If there´s no law and order WITH the troops, there won´t be law and order WITHOUT them.
    • nondescrypt, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3If CNN says Iraq needs us, then I guess Iraq has spoken...
    • jarinudom, on 03/31/2008, -0/+2Probably because al-Maliki is an incompetent spineless worm who agrees with whoever is in the room at the time. The Iraqis seriously need to have a vote of no-confidence in him and replace him with someone who will take charge of the situation and actually try to fix things instead of bowing down to the local warlords.
      • Glugory, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1As much as I agree with you, I think they'd have more success in funding a program to train pigs to fly.
  • phenry50BMG, on 10/11/2007, -5/+24Last I heard our troops are there for our freedom. If they weren't there, we'd have terrorists lining up to come kill all of us here tomorrow. Considering our southern border is as porous as a sieve, that theory has been blown to *****. We send our border patrol over there to secure their border. How nice is that?

    The again, Michael 'the demon' Chertoff has a gut feeling that *****'s gonna happen soon. Maybe we need to ramp things up over there to keep us even more free than we already are. You'd think the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act and all of the other freedom initiatives would be enough to keep us free forever. Next thing you know Halliburton will be building detention facilities on US soil or something crazy like that to really keep us safe.

    I've got the cure for Mikey.
  • itsjussed, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5the head of the US also says we are doing the right thing. doesnt mean its true does it?
  • Junkyarddawg, on 10/11/2007, -15/+17Because the "heads of Iraq" are lying.

    The iraqi government is loyal to the iran-backed shiite insurgency, and want the US out so they can get on with slaughtering sunnis, stepping up the already on-going ethnical cleansing of southern Iraq and Baghdad. The kurds have much the same idea, but for the northern part of Iraq.

    If the US troops retreated into the megafortresses and shut the doors today, there'd be an instant bloodbath on a Rwandan scale.
    • nblsavage, on 10/11/2007, -12/+12You really are a paranoid right-wing nutcase.
      • jtwesley17, on 10/11/2007, -10/+7Ah then you must be one of those highly educated intellectual leftists.
        Seriously, what are you? 11? Lets leave the name calling to the juveniles. It doesn't add to the discussion in any positive way.
        Thanks! ^_^
      • Junkyarddawg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yeah, I'm so rightwing I support Obama.

        Seriously, educate yourself on the political situation in Iraq. It's not like the information isn't available. You can start with the Channel4 documentary "Death Squads", that sets the stage pretty well for what's going on in Iraq right now. It's on YouTube. Hop to it, leftie.
    • TheG2, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7And yet another ignorant digger (nblsavage) shows just how uninformed the American people are when it comes to the relationship between two religious sects. Junkyard is pretty much dead on.
      • OswaldKenobi, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Oh really? So, the Shiites, Bathists, and Sunnis just get along great. In all the history of Iraq, there has never been any ethnic cleansing at all? I'm sure the Palestinians and the Israelis get along wonderfully too. It's just a fabrication of the American media. Tell me how ignorant nblsavage is.
        • TheG2, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4You didn't read my post did you? My point is that if we just leave, the ruling party is quickly going to kill the others...reading comprehension for the win.
    • nondescrypt, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1U ! S ! A ! , U ! S ! A !, U ! S ! A !
    • monjorob, on 10/10/2007, -0/+0we withdrew during the 2004 election to leave a "smaller footprint" so there wouldn't be deaths in the news everyday. all American forces lived in their barracks, and would go out on "safety patrols" but did very little to actually enforce order. what was the result you say? Sunni death squads, more civilian deaths than any other time during the invasion, and wide spread insurgent activity against politically and socially important figures. it really is a giant ***** storm. We can't leave. We can't stay.
  • Clogs, on 10/11/2007, -9/+28Oil
    • RunawayElf, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1With answers like this, you should be in politics (or maybe you already are?)
      • rhabd0mancer, on 10/11/2007, -4/+2Bush mentioned the word "oil" only twice in his press conference.

        I think Clogs could become Presidunce some day.
    • sj41, on 10/11/2007, -3/+0what? huh, oil? who said somethin about oil, bitch you cookin?
    • birdman1169, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2Oil, now that is original and it's starting to sound as foolish as the Iraqi PM.
    • Clogs, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2U.S. Dollar vs. the Euro: Another Reason for the Invasion of Iraq

      In November 2000, Iraq became the first OPEC nation to begin selling its oil for Euros. Since then, the value of the Euro has increased 17%, and the dollar has begun to decline. One important reason for the invasion and installation of a U.S. dominated government in Iraq was to force the country back to the dollar. Another reason for the invasion is to dissuade further OPEC momentum toward the Euro, especially from Iran- the second largest OPEC producer, who was actively discussing a switch to Euros for its oil exports.

      http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/19.html
  • readthis, on 10/11/2007, -8/+15So Why Are We Frick'n There?

    EXXON, MOBILE, and BP for starters stand to pluck the Iraqi people for about $21 Trillion 50 years or 21 trillion dollars worth of oil:
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/30/155142/473
    • hoserjoe, on 10/11/2007, -5/+1Good idea! It's about time those useless assassins started to pay for their upkeep. 21 trillion sounds like a nice round number.
  • jimmye, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4don't pretend like you don't know
  • dildoolielly, on 10/11/2007, -17/+34HERE'S WHY WE ARE IN IRAQ

    The Bush/Cheney regime already had the intention to invade Iraq - even before 9/11. They just needed the excuse and 9/11 gave them just enough to twist to railroad an invasion.

    All Osama was to George W. Bush was an excuse. The excuse. After 9/11 Bush was free to invade according to PNAC plan.

    Iraq was supposed to be like the Falklands or Panama - in and out and a great victory for a president to build support for other PNAC agenda items.

    In some ways we are lucky it backfired on the bastard. The agenda was the wholesale hijacking of the Constitution and the Nation.
    • tehpwnrate, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I'd say we would be much better off if 50 US troops had died instead of 3600+ to successfully free an oppressed people from the clutches of a genocidal maniac, a 6-month victory left to the history books. I don't know if it's at all lucky that it backfired, since it's not like anything came of it other than more US dead and more Iraqi dead.
    • TheG2, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Welcome to the conspiracy theory section of digg.
      • dildoolielly, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Your lack of a competent rebuttal to my original post speaks volumes.

        I take that post to mean you have accepted defeat. Thanks

        I suggest you get your skul fvked head out of your poop shoot and wake up.

        Do some research, for about twenty years then come back and post.

        We don’t want to hear any more of your ill informed garbage until then

        What is it like, having the brain of a two year old?
  • Renton, on 10/11/2007, -15/+7I do($)n't k($)now, let($)'s ask($) the p($)resi($)de($)nt.
    • ElRayQuieres, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8I think you meant: I don't know, let'$ a$k the pre$ident.
    • nondescrypt, on 10/11/2007, -3/+1why was this dugg down?? it's a great comment
  • Artzealot, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5Why are we there? that's the million dollar question.
    • perogi21, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2Make that the billion dollar question.
      • spyd3rweb, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2actually its closer to a trillion dollars now.
  • 7Mystery, on 10/11/2007, -4/+1Oil
  • Asure, on 10/11/2007, -6/+12Outlandishly
    Idiotic
    Logic
  • zobs, on 10/11/2007, -6/+2Why wasting B$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ our money there BUSH? please lie to us.... please!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • joltek, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3Question:
    So why are we frick'n there ?

    Answer: For the flowers and candies,
    Of course if you believed the myth, we're there to secure the oil fields of Iraq
  • gigabyte3d, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5What do you expect when you elect a Monkey into the White House?
  • TheWriteGuy, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2About two weeks ago, al-Maliki was facing a no-confidence vote, and there was word that behind the scenes that the White House was moving to have him replaced. Hmmm.
  • adml_shake, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4I wonder if anyone had thought that maybe he said this so no one with a bomb strapped to their chest decides to go off out side of his office?
  • Kegsterino, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Why are we there? Easy answer - the very first name for the Iraq War was 'Operation Iraqi Liberation'. This is not a joke - you can google it. A day later the white house spokesperson very quickly said 'Mistake, Mistake - it's going to be called Operation Iraqi Freedom'.
    The acronym's say it all my friend.
    The US, with UK and Australian help, have built 14 PERMANENT military bases in Iraq. Do you honestly think we have a free press when NOT ONE of them ever ever ever asks the questions like 'Erm .. hey Hilary, Barack, Cheney... what are you going to do with all those billion dollar military bases? Are you going to turn them into Iraqi youth centres if the Iraqi government so wishes?'.
    The US embassy in Iraq is bigger than the freakin Vatican!!! Iraq is the new Phillipines and NOBODY is going to pull out of there for as long as we're all living. Trust me on that. More terror and hatred to come.
    • swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3"The President this morning has spoken with three foreign leaders. He began with Prime Minister Blair, where the two discussed the ongoing aspects of Operation Iraqi Liberation." -Ari Fleischer, White House Press Secretary, 2003
      http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030324-4.html
      • obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1That press conference is a chuckle. 3-24-2003 and people are already asking about the rights of prisoners at Guantanamo! Humanitarian aid to Iraq, the Iraqi economy ...you don't hear stuff about those items anymore. Other nations participating in the cost of the war?! The idea that one supplemental budget was enough to pay for the war. Nice blast from the past.
  • sirvincent, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3For some odd reason, this reminds me of the "How Gullible Are We?" story...
  • Ethanael, on 10/11/2007, -3/+6Why? Because if we leave, we'll be back in ~10 years to fix the mess that we left. The only difference will be more bloodshed and your children fighting that war. There is no ***** way that Iraq can stand on its own feet right now.
  • jwl23, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7If we're there for oil, why the hell does it keep getting more expensive? I wish we would start stealing the stuff already.
    • faskill, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Because the people getting the oil and selling to us our setting the price how they want.
      • jwl23, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Yeah, and they were doing it before we invaded, too.

        So obviously the supply is decreasing, even though we are supposed to be increasing the oil supply by "stealing" it.
        • swrostmore, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Did you really think turning Iraq into a war zone was going to INCREASE the oil supply? Its all about CONTROL.
    • a1532b, on 10/11/2007, -0/+3Just because it is cheaper for the manufacturer does NOT mean they will pass the savings onto the consumer. Higher profit margins are the goal of capitalism, not happy customers...And when a business has a product that is essential for the world to keep on spinning, along with no alternatives readily available, they don't have to do a damned thing for you!
    • obliviousfool, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The oil question is more complex than we realize. Saddam was messing with oil prices because he was pumping wildly irregular amounts of oil. He had become the main factor in determining the price of oil. He was the swinging supplier! This made him an enemy more than anything else. So we invaded. What was the plan for the oil? According to Greg Palast, there were two plans. (He claims to have them both.) One was backed by big oil. One was backed by the state department. Both involve stabilizing the price of oil and giving the US a controlling interest in OPEC, but the big oil plan didn't necessarily involve keeping prices of oil low for anyone. They make more money if the supply is low and the price is high. They tend to back politicians that keep it this way. Much of the clusterfscking we see in Iraq seems to have occurred because of the disagreement about what to do with the oil on our side. At first, some geniuses (such as Bremer) wanted to sell off Iraqi oil-assets to private companies, not realizing that this would be seen by the whole world for what it was, a very blatant oil grab. Now we have these really generous oil profit-sharing agreements, which seem more agreeable to the world even if the effect is the same. The sad part is that by signing on to these things, not only is oil leaving Iraq, but the oil money is leaving as well. This puts the Iraqi economy (such that it is) in the lurch. We tried establishing a fund to help rebuild Iraq out of oil money, the Iraq Development Fund, but that got raided to a very comical effect. No re-building happened. I guess my point is that any time you have people fighting over a resource worth trillions of dollars you're going to see some disagreement. We are there to get a controlling interest in OPEC, but "we" is many different parties.
  • faskill, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2This should insult Bush. If we are there preserving democracy and attempting to help them and they in turn say "we no longer need your help", why don't we pull out, and let their sovereignty erode. Besides, don't we want to invade Iran now?
  • rlegions, on 10/11/2007, -2/+2For the oil?
  • Springdaddy, on 10/11/2007, -3/+2Is 80 percent of the people here liberals and Bush-bashers?
    • floatingpoints, on 10/11/2007, -3/+3According to your definitions, yes.

      But the problem is your definition of "liberal" is all wrong.

      See, you think every single person who opposes Bush is a "liberal". That's simply not the case. Most people who oppose Bush are truly progressive and intelligent individuals.

      So really it's you that's out of place here.
      • blackbamboo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0Progressive is a code word for Liberal. Its only used by liberals. I am not sure why liberals don't like being called liberals? Hey if all conservatives good and bad are lumped into the same group as conservatives like fawell and Bush. Than all liberals have to get lumped in the same pot as kennedy and Michael Moore? Many conservative are pissed off at Bush too. Does that make them intelligent?
    • Jerrellw, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1No.
      90%
    • SouthsideIrish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2I'm a classical liberal and a Bush basher. Get it right.
  • bennnno, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3If the Iraqi's could keep there own country safe I am sure our troops would be out. A few days ago everyone was talking about how horrible this PM was, now his words are trusted. Buried because of the lack thought in posting.
  • CriX, on 10/11/2007, -5/+6I'm turning off Politics on digg now. I can't stand being subjected to any more highschool opinions and debate over geopolitics. "Why are we frickin' there??" Waaaaaaahh, why, mommy, whyyy??? Why did Walt Disney lie to me??? Waaaaahhh.
    • Tarl, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Good. stop commenting now then.
    • Buelldozer, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You can turn it off all you want but it won't help. I've seen this before, when enough people turn off Politics they'll just start posting it to other categories so you'll see it anyway. For instance, this topic is in "World News" and not politics. I turned Politics off weeks ago, yet I'm still seeing, and reading, this stuff.

      Look closely at what happened with this topic. The topic itself really does belong in World News however through the use of a politically based summary the ENTIRE discussion turned into a US political debate.

      What could have been an intelligent discussion on the state of Iraq's readiness and it's government stability and control instead turned into a huge "Bush sucks!" and "My candidate can do better" circle jerk.

      Wheee, ain't Digg fun?!?!?!
  • Corrosionx, on 10/11/2007, -3/+4Face it, the only man who will get the U.S. out of Iraq is Ron Paul.
    • MikeCampo, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Unfortunately he isn't being paid off like the more popular candidates and he will never get the limelight that he deserves. Gotta love 'democracy'.
  • Igei, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2hahaha. yeah he says we can leave whenever we want but then says that they still need our money, our weapons and our troops for training his shmucks. think about it people...they're not ready.
  • rowlodge, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1boom headshot!...
    or saddam the 2nd...
  • floatingpoints, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3It's okay to type "*****", you know. We do live in a free country.
    • ziffel, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3I wonder for how much longer.
    • Jerrellw, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Correct and we are free to block you with profanity filters.
    • SouthsideIrish, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1This is a free country, but it isn't a free web site. Revision 3 is free to block anything they want, since they own the web site, and we cannot say anything about it.
  • kweee, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1"Iraq's Head Says They Can Keep Country Secure - So Why Are We Frick'n There"

    Because Iraq's head is wrong? Maybe we should leave Iraq, but not simply because its head thinks they're ready.
  • gravedigg, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Answer to the title: They aren't secure. They would just like to think they were. That's why we are stuck there. IF we leave now they will collapse and the blame will fall on us as it always does for EVERYTHING.
  • Klydethegreater, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1why are we frikin' there?

    Same reason we went in, oil and Isreal
  • FrameShift, on 10/11/2007, -1/+1In the immortal words of the great Prophet, Eric Cartman, "they're sandmonkeys."
  • Tarl, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Welp! Sounds like a wrap. Rear Admiral, let's get them ships over there and load 'em up!!

    Oh, wait. Bush and arm chair generals say we must "stay longer."
  • SD929, on 10/11/2007, -4/+3Duplicate. Buried.
  • smartass007, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4'we' (as in 'we the people') aren't there (iraq)...the military monster our taxes fund are there...to build permanent bases to protect republican business enterprises (like haliburton) and protecting 'our republican christian way of life'
  • blackbamboo, on 10/11/2007, -1/+0We are there now to stop Iran back forces from taking over the whole country. As soon as we leave the Countries backing the Sunnis will have to step in. The worse part is Bin Laden is a sunni and we now fighting him and his enemy. So we leave...we fight Bin Laden backed terrorist here and Saudi Arabia will have to go in with the other sunni nations and fight back the Iranians and there backers. Its a mess. This is not over by a long shot. Ethnic cleansing was ok to stop in bosnia as long as they were white but now the libs don't want to stop it for the arabs. So who does that make the real racist? Sounds like the dems to me.
  • Shaman760, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Sure we could leave but Halliburton's 2nd qtr earnings would disappoint their shareholders. And you KNOW Cheney isn't about to let that occur. He has a responsibility to his people, dammit!
  • rlh1, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2So if we're there to protect the republican business enterprises, Cheney's cronies, Neocons interests, etc, secure oil for right wing fascist corporations,........what happens when the Democrats take over in 2008. Will they stop helping all these right wing chumps, or are the Democrats controlled by these corporations too ?
  • chriskzoo, on 10/11/2007, -2/+1Even as a supporter of the war, I say we take this as an opportunity to pull out. It will surely lead to mass chaos, a second attack on the scale of 9/11 with nobody hunting down insurgents there, and THEN maybe the rest of the world will wake up - at least for a year or two like they did in 2001.
  • nondescrypt, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3To protect a bunch of Muslims & make them "Free", because the U.S. cares for the well being of others
  • bwhancock, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Does this mean we won in Iraq?
  • techweenie, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2We're there because W, like many 'dry drunks' cannot admit to having made a mistake.
  • origclubsoda, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1HAHAHAHA. They cant even keep the police from killing iraqis. You guys are about as clever as a rock
  • rex3, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1the last thing i heard out of the us was zionism
  • IrishJoe, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Bush says that we're only in Iraq because the Iraqis want us there. A survey of Iraqis showed that an overwhelming majority want us out. Recently the Iraqi Parliament voted for us to leave. Bush said we have to stay because Prime Minister al Maliki wants us to stay. But Maliki says the Iraqi army and police are capable of keeping security in Iraq when American troops leave and we can leave can leave any time we want. The American People also want our troops to come home. Why are we still there, Mr. Bush? You've lost your last excuse. The Iraqis want us out and the American People want us out. Must I remind you that you are an employee of the American People not a nation unto yourself? Do what the Iraqis and the American People want and let our service members come home to the families and nation that love them. NOW!
  •  

    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.