What is Digg?97 Comments
- knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -21/+73Bush -wants- things to stay bad.
The whole neocon administration is elated that it is not going well.
That way the quagmire forces US taxpayer dollars to continue pouring into Cheney's Halliburton and they and the rest of the industrial-military complex keep getting richer and richer.
That's why Diebold put Bush there, so he could do this thing for the rest of the Corporate overmasters.
I don't know this for a fact, no. But it is within the realm of possibilities and all possibilities should be considered when our sons dying for admitted lies and noone seems to be doing anything about that travesty. - ArgusSmith, on 10/11/2007, -5/+28@odd
Yes, that's right. In four years, we've managed to almost get half of one city in the country of Iraq under control. PARTAY! - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -12/+32I haven't seen one positive thing this war has done.
BUCK FUSH - sathias, on 10/11/2007, -6/+18if there are elections in '08
- strafefire, on 10/11/2007, -0/+12Hey...did anyone notice this weekend that Afghanistan has pretty much been lost too?
- ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -2/+13According to John Perkins's (Confessions of an economic hitman) conference on C-span, the goal of the first Iraq war was to convince Saddam to sign many contracts with US multinationals, but he did not. They then tried to assassinate him, but he had too many doubles. So a second war had to be fought, to completely privatize the economy.
It is even worse than that according to Noam Chomsky: after the first Iraq war in 1991, the powers that be decided to destroy the civil infrastructure of Iraq to raise civilian mortality, and they continued destroying Iraq with this new war, to decrease the amount of money that the Iraqi government spent on public services, and to also decrease the average salary an Iraqi expects (Iraqi now just expect to live and eat maybe, while 20 years ago Iraq had by far the largest middle class in that part of the World: that cost a lot, and puts a lot of downward pressure on profits). From a capitalist point of view, it helped decrease the part of the GNP of Iraq going to the Iraqi people, and raise the part of the GDP that goes to the capitalists.
According to Greg Palast, another goal of both wars was to decrease oil production to help raise the price of oil, making Bush and Cheney's oil buddies much much richer than ever.
Type Greg Palast, John Perkins and Noam Chomsky and Iraq in emule: you wil find a lot of very interesting stuff, like Iraq for Sale ! - jmpeagle, on 10/11/2007, -6/+17don't worry, when the lull in the fighting comes in September/October...Bush will declare success. Of course he will not mention it is Ramadan and that statistically violence always fallls belowe average during that time and then rises above average right after which is what the GOP claimed was the insurgents trying to influence our elections least year despite the fact that it happened at the same time on their calendar every year.
- gardnert1, on 10/11/2007, -5/+16Wait a second.... theres BAD news coming out of Iraq? I better report this to FOX News!
- gardnert1, on 10/11/2007, -3/+14if theres a United States in.... err... '10?
Damn, all the good numbers were taken! - knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -7/+17if there is a planet in '12.
- dodus, on 10/11/2007, -4/+13Digg me up if you're tired of hearing "tinfoil hat" every SINGLE time someone suggests that things *might* be more complex than they appear on the surface.
- ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -2/+11@oddcarom
Actually, you are wrong, the situation has also deteriorated in many other places, the most symbolic being Basrah, which used to be very peaceful under the wise British command. The Brits know it full well. Stop watching the lying US corporate media!
Next please! - knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8i think the Constitution is as perfect as mankind can muster. it's our enforcement of the Constitution that is lax.
- Tippis, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7"Bush -wants- things to stay bad."
From a political psychology standpoint, it's a classical and well-known tactic to 'extend a crisis' to gain, and keep, the political acceptability needed to introduce sweeping reforms (in a very general sense -- the debate on wether or not those reforms are for the better or for the worse is a separate topic).
Politics and change generally don't mix, but on-going crisis has long been known to nullify the inherent inertia of political decision. The last 6 years provide more proof of this than anyone would ever need... or want... - PsychoticClown, on 10/11/2007, -2/+8The part I liked is that the Pentagon is saying it's still too early to tell if the surge worked or not. NO, IT'S NOT. LOL, I knew they lied all the time but didn't expect them to do it to my face in the same news story they're contradicting themselves in.
- ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -0/+5To know how bad the situation really is, it is interesting to know if the Iraqis are coming back to Iraq, or leaving Iraq this year. While reading the news for Sunday ( http://www.uruknet.info/?colonna=m&p=33773&l=i&size=1&hd=0 ), I stumbled upon this:
McClatchy's Hannah Allen describes the swelling stream of refugees from Iraq into Syria:
http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17380478.htm
Excerpt that tells a lot about the situation in Iraq:
Nobody used the word "crisis" when the first wave of Iraqis fled the war and settled here. Most came with deep savings accounts and connections to well-placed Damascus businessmen.
The word didn't crop up when a second wave ushered in the Christians, whose clergy organized them into a vocal, cohesive bloc. Nor did it come into play with the villagers who were simply absorbed into remote desert communities because their tribes straddle the Syrian-Iraqi border.
But the word definitely applies now, as shell-shocked Iraqis of all backgrounds pour into Syria at the rate of nearly 1,000 a day. In fact, "crisis" may not be strong enough, as the flow of Iraqis becomes a torrent. At least 1.4 million are already here, according to the United Nations, each with a story of terror and trauma and a need for services that is stretching Syrians' patience. Many believe the number may be higher.
snip
Bush administration officials have long accused Syria of not doing enough to stop al-Qaida sympathizers from slipping into Iraq, but they barely mention the far larger number of Iraqis who cross the border in the other direction. The United States remains at the bottom of the list of countries that have accepted Iraqi refugees, though the State Department has promised to admit as many as 7,000 this year.
Syrian schools and hospitals are overrun with Iraqis. Housing prices have soared, sowing resentment and anger in Syrians who can no longer afford to live in their neighborhoods. Iraqi refugees have turned the districts of Qudsiya, Jaramana and Sayeda Zeinab into "Little Baghdads," right down to replica restaurants, cafes and clothing stores.
U.N. aid workers who provide services to trauma victims and families with medical emergencies are overwhelmed - nearly every Iraqi qualifies. Syrian relief groups that once catered to needy Syrians now deal almost exclusively with Iraqi victims of violence. - Osjpr, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Don't digg ISIfunded911 down... Anyone who knows the history of the CIA knows that they are somewhere in Iraq purposefully inciting violence to try and manipulate the situation.
- dodus, on 10/11/2007, -3/+8fuzzmeister: "Why don't you keep the truther spam to the truther sites?"
fuzzmeister: "Nice...everyone loves an ad hominem."
Hmmm. - illycoffee, on 10/11/2007, -1/+6Diggbat - 60% means that the surge has only penetrated 40% of the city for control.
MICHAEL YON EMAILS INSTAPUNDIT FROM IRAQ: "This is a very serious offensive kicking off in Iraq. The NYT realizes it's serious, but nobody that I am seeing realizes just how big this is. Relatively massive." - gardnert1, on 10/11/2007, -5/+9it depends on your perspective. I heard they've installed a fountain that spews liquid gold in the lobby of the Fed. And hey, did you SEE how many swimming pools the new US Embassy has in the green zone?
- ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -3/+7maninthemiddle, I wonder if you are honestly blind or a neocon in disguise.
What you are saying in your messages is: let us trust the crazy killing USians who have killed millions of Iraqis since 1991 (the bombings of the Iraqi infrastructure and economic sanctions between both wars killed at least half a million babies and children, as Madeleine Albright herself admitted: video available on emule, and probably on youtube)! They should be the ones in charge in Iraq. Trust those who created chaos! Like in Vietnam?
Noone is more deceptive than the people who like you pretend to be wise, but propose to keep trusting the crazies! Stay the bloody course! If Arabs invaded the US 4 years ago and killed millions of citizens, destroyed your country, would you ask them to stay the course? - ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -4/+8I forgot the worse: many people thought that Negroponte would make things worse in Iraq.
And in fact, there are many testimonies of Iraqis who tell that they have been hired by the US forces to drive a car or a truck, and to wait in front of a mosque, where they left the vehicle to go buy a drink or take a walk, and all of a sudden the vehicle exploded. Which means the civil war has been escalated on purpose by the US. A peaceful Iraq would need no men in arms. The military-industrial-secret-services complex, which shares the real power in the US with Wall Street bankers, would make no money on a peaceful Earth. By the way, they destroyed democracy in Iran in 1953 (CIA's Kermit Roosevelt got rid of Mossadeq), and dropped the Shah when he became independent minded, and ordered France to let Khomeiny come back. If Iran democracy had been left alone, and if Iraq democracy had been left alone (young Saddam was paid by the CIA to try to kill the president), how could an invasion of this part of the World had been justified after decades of democracy?
The World is a stage. Stop watching TV! Read books! Watch documentaries! - ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4Ah hominem attacks are not necessarily worthless. The personality of the person that writes has to be taken into account very often, for example if the person is not sane, is not being objective or rational,...many persons are neurotic and express their neurotic biases when talking about important subjects. For example many human beings have a pathological respect for figures of authority (president, boss, famous news anchor, general,...)...unconsciously their father or mother, with whom they have a neurotic relationship. Conformism too can be explained thanks to psychoanalysis. They are also pathological liars. The list goes on.
- sabach, on 10/11/2007, -0/+4First of all the Pentagon was finished and dedicated in 1943.
Maybe I don't understand the global situation in the late '30s. Japan was in the process of dominating nearly all their neighbors. Some of the vital raw materials you speak of were in a US territory, the Philippines. They fully understood the scope of what the American industrial machine meant, and knew their only chance was to demoralize the American voting public. Many young Japanese military leaders were educated at American colleges so they knew what could be awakened. Their plan was actually a good one, however they failed to completely destroy the Pacific Fleet and most importantly the aircraft carriers. Also unfortunately for them, they didn't understand one very important thing, that Americans were composed of disenfranchised Irish, German, Italian and Jewish immigrants who'd ***** you up if you tried to ruin what they spent decades trying to build. Maybe it was because the Japanese had no experience with immigrants, the whole idea was foreign to them. The much-vaunted "Warrior Culture" of pseudo-samurai Japan didn't stand a chance against a horde of pissed-off hoodlums from the mean streets.
You do make a good point though, I agree that almost all foreign bases should be closed, especially those in Germany and Korea. It's about time they defended their own countries. But I object to calling our military "crazies", they're just grunts doing their job as their commanders order them to, it's what a soldier does. - sabach, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5ad hominem arguments are the majority of what's posted on digg. Personal attacks are the last refuge of those who can't understand what you're talking about. But having said that, I appreciate the heads-up on the video and plan to watch it.
- totorototoro, on 10/11/2007, -2/+6so..only 40% is "in control"? And how much of that is the "Green Zone"?
- UCFGavin, on 10/11/2007, -1/+5I wish we would get our troops out of there. I would imagine that 40% is around where they are building that 105 acre $600 million embassy.
- Maninthemiddle, on 10/11/2007, -7/+10It's a wonderful thought. No wars, no hunger, no poverty. Unfortunately, bad men do bad things. It has always been so, and (sadly) will probably continue to be. The longer good people wait to respond, the worse the situation. And (again sadly) sometimes democracy has needed US bases and US lives to germinate.
Now that doesn't ascertain whether we should have gone in or not (I voted for not). But now the mess has turned into a fight against Al Qaeda and Islamists as much as the insurgents.
I read voraciously (the good the bad and the pure ugly), and from several sides it is estimated that 90% of the suicide bombings are via non-Iraqis. It's simple - if the surge works, then Iraqis have a viable chance - and we can begin to draw down (though not completely). If it fails, the people that bring you suicide bombings and plane crashes have a nice foothold.
Since we are there, and obviously not coming home until sometime after September, we should all hope for the best, not for failure. - byronm, on 10/11/2007, -8/+11Don't know how anyone can support the war. Do you support killing people? do you support people dying? Do you support people getting mamed & mutilated? What exactly DO you support when you say you support the war? I just don't get it.
Anywho, the only way to win, is to pull out and claim we satisfied our tactical needs. Sadamm is gone, his administration is gone, there are no WMD's, there are no chemical weapons, there is no long range tactical force able to hit israel anymore and for every stated reason we said we needed to be there we are done with so what is the holdup?
GWB's escalation of the war is like adding more dried trees to a forrest fire. Unless you pull out the fuel (us) and let things simmer (some sizzling may go on) the fire (war) will never burn out.
Democracy? Really? Does democracy take US bases? Does democracy take US lives? What exactly is "democracy"? Do we export it? Import it?
War.. huh.. you know the rest. - reboare, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7Coming to a Spin News Factory near you:
"Bagdhad, the glass is 40% full, not 60% empty! - yingjai, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4How many times have people said the war is illegal, out of control, unjustified, etc etc... and how many times have any one of you Americans done anything to stop it? It's great that a lot of you recognize that the war is a disaster, but why not do something about it?
- gardnert1, on 10/11/2007, -5/+8at this point... dont the US Military, contractors, and media make up about 40% of Bagdad? Or is this an area-based percentage? In that case, dont US military bases and the green zone make up about 40% of Bagdad?
- knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3taking sadam out the way it was done was against US law and international treaty and is thus unconstitutional - period
Article IV of the United States Constitution:
This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. - waxoff, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5@knomevol
It applies equally. And I'm looking at you. - Maninthemiddle, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6Knom
I did listen to him today - at length. I like to listen first hand and read several accounts. Too many media sources have a habit of cherry picking one side or the other. And I can say that while he is giving no guarantees of anything, he believes positive things are happening, and we should know where we stand in September.
Saying things are problematic and will continue to be is the way it is in an armed conflict. The other side does not just quit fighting because a new tactic is brought forth. - simplejoe79, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3"long live cynicism...hail insanity...down wid ppl of iraq.." wonder if dat is Bush's strategy to win the next election...
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2@ markgl
I honestly do not see any way, shape or form that the US can "win" in Iraq - even if occupying for another 20 years. Really.
Since the beginning of the occupation the US has consistently not looked into who is joining the Iraqi police force and because of that there is an overwhelming tide - hidden and unhidden - of revenge killings that have spun out of control.
And, importantly, as this BBC documentary illustrates, the US government leadership is not interested in regulating the police; the US is just interested in getting police "boots on the ground" and, as Rumsfeld said to one Army guy in the video regarding the death squads "That's their problem."
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-377952052252839443&q=duration%3Along
Can you please tell me a way that the US can "win"? - knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3just like in vietnam, US leaders have made it impossible for there to actually be a "victory". keep the quagmire rolling and tax dollars flowing.
- Crazytree, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2we control the same 40% we controlled on day 1 very likely... IE industrial areas and vacant land for the most part.
- ISIfunded911, on 10/11/2007, -3/+5@sabach
For me the armed US Americans in Iraq are the crazies there. Over the years they killed more Iraqis than bloody Saddam and today's militias combined did!
My belied is that all US military bases around the World should be closed, and the empire dismantled. The Pentagon and the CIA, directly or indirectly, have killed so many people and helped so many dictators that the World will be better off if they stay home, or even better, are dismantled too. WWII was just an exception. And anyway, Hitler was funded in part by US corporations (like Ford and several bankers), and the Japanese were forced to attack the US for their industrial survival: the Pentagon blocked the Japanese access to vital raw materials. - 09f91102, on 10/11/2007, -15/+16Anyone who doubts corporate control of America should check out Zeitgeist, the Movie. Its currently available on Digg and torrent sites. Its a bit long (around 2 hours) but it will absolutely change your thinking about the way the government, and religion, works. No matter what your political affiliation is you will not regret watching this documentary
- fuzzmeister, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@dodus
Hmm, I have to admit, you're right on that one. - kirakun, on 10/11/2007, -4/+5I wish there is a bury button on Bush.
- Albionshores, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Very successfully. It would be going with the grain of the people. In Iraq the US are occupiers and exploiters, and thats very much against the grain.
- Albionshores, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2It was his own comment summing up his thoughts. The regular line from Washington is always that progress is being made. The article goes against that line of thinking. Only 40% of Baghdad. Things are going pretty bad. The source is provided. If you think reporters don't put their own feelings in their work then you are deluded.
Thank you 6thPlanet....I don't use Yahoo news myself so would not have come across this article had you not brought it up. - smek2, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2And despite that fact, they're already talking about bombing Iran. Go ahead, arrogance will have a fall.
- geoffg, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3"The line between cynicism and foolishness is too often crossed."
That's a great line! (writes down feverishly in personal neocon talking point book) - RollFizzlebeef, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3I was going make a cynical joke about the 40%, but the guy who said "40% of Baghdad is under control (that's almost half of the capital)" beat me to it, and he wasn't even trying to be funny.
- knomevol, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1sorry, that's actually an excerpt of article VI
- illycoffee, on 10/10/2007, -0/+1Are things still getting worse today?
-
Show 51 - 92 of 92 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is