Today's Situation Room:

Wolf Blitzer delivers the most important breaking news and political, international, and national security stories of the day. Tune to The Situation Room weekdays 5-6:30pm ET on CNN.

Wolf Blitzer delivers the most important breaking news and political, international, and national security stories of the day. Tune to The Situation Room weekdays 5-6:30pm ET on CNN.

BLITZER'S BLOG: Civil war dangers in Iraq
December 22nd, 2011
04:32 PM ET

BLITZER'S BLOG: Civil war dangers in Iraq

By Wolf Blitzer, CNN

(CNN) - It’s not even a week since all U.S. troops have been pulled out of Iraq, but the situation there is quickly deteriorating. I don’t think it’s by any means out of the question that civil war is possible.

The terror attacks in the country Thursday were brutal – scores dead, many more innocents wounded. The pictures are horrendous.

Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki, a Shiite, is losing credibility with Iraqi Sunnis. They have been alarmed by his government’s decision to charge the Sunni vice president with terrorism charges. Earlier, they were deeply angered by his refusal to name a defense or interior minister, consolidating power within his own hands.

This is no way for a democratic leader to operate.

The Obama administration’s top Iraq point people are engaged and trying to ease this crisis.

CIA Director David Petraeus made a secret visit to Iraq in recent days but apparently didn’t get much.

Vice President Joe Biden was there earlier and has been on the phone with the Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish leaders.

“The vice president also reiterated the need for actions to be guided by the rule of law and Iraq’s constitution,” the White House said. “At this difficult time, the United States stands with Iraq as a strategic partner and a close friend.”

Meanwhile, some 17,000 Americans remain in Iraq – half are diplomats and their support staff, the others are private security contractors. As I’ve said before, I am very worried about their safety if civil war erupts.

Follow Wolf Blitzer on Twitter: @WolfBlitzerCNN

RELATED STORY: Wave of attacks kills dozens amid Iraq's upheaval

Post by:
Filed under: Iraq • Situation Room • Wolf Blitzer
soundoff (89 Responses)
  1. Christopher

    The elder President Bush had it right with respect to Iraq. He kept Hussain in check, but present as a hedge against Iran. Many who opposed the invasion as unprpovoked agression understood that we would lose strategically in the region if the Shiia majority that had been supported throughout Saddam's reign by Iran came to power. Those who bought the Bush/Cheney nonsense about a short war paid for by Iraqi oil should be ashamed of themselves, especially if they lived through the Vietnam War, as I did. Their credibility gap was obvious and glaring on WMDs too and everyone but the completely uninformed knew that Iraq had nothing to do with 911!!!

    President Obama campaigned on the promise that he would leave Iraq and double-down on Afghanistan, but President Bush boxed him in on Iraq with the Status of Forces agreement he negotiated with Iraq just before the new president took office. President Obama was tied to the Bush timeline, whether he liked it or not, so those from the left who've blamed him for that are misguided. President Obama tried to re-negotiate a new SOFA, but since Iraq wouldn't grant immunity to American troops, the President wouldn't agree to keep them there in harm's way. I think that was the correct decision and some of those who have slammed the President for not maintaining a presence would have railed against him if they had stayed there without immunity in a potential war zone.

    I agree with those on this blog who say once we took Saddam out, the ultimate result we are seeing was inevitable. Like Vietnam, the crime wasn't leaving, it was escalating in the first place.

    December 27, 2011 at 5:50 pm |
  2. AntiFringe

    After sending in troops there are 2 choices.

    1. You eventually withdraw (Vietnam)
    2. You stay. (Korea)

    Think hard before you commit.

    December 22, 2011 at 9:50 pm |
    • Marilyn

      If I had to choose, pulling our soldiers from Vietnam would best satisfy the need for assisting Iraqi civilians and surrounding area's. Since, North Korea will soon be under an unexperienced new dictatorship; therefore, constant monitoring and observation is greatly needed. How many U.S. soldiers are on Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) between South and North Korea? Whatever the number at this time I would not remove them. On the other hand, the U.S. can and could possibly send a large number of U.S. most skilled soldiers into Iraq. Additionally, not to mention that Iran is a neighbor under nuclear weapon watch. I'm not an expert on foreign affairs, but these are my thoughts in reply to antiFringe.

      December 26, 2011 at 6:02 pm |
  3. cigarman

    Let them be. They have been killing each other for years. Maybe they will be successful and wipe each other off the map. US, stay out of it.

    December 22, 2011 at 9:14 pm |
  4. Sal Palma

    When you look at the region's history over the last 60 years its not at all surprising to encounter a Shia undertow. For at least that long, Sunni Muslims have been at the center of power and influence with the Shia community relegated to second-class citizens. I think Iraq will emerge as another Shia state. What we can all hope for is that tolerance will be at the center of its thought process. If they expect to succeed, a U.S. style democracy is not necessarily pivotal; however, what is central to success is that Iraqi Shias and Sunnis need to see themselves as Iraqi's first.

    December 22, 2011 at 8:11 pm |
  5. paul

    they wanted american forces out , let saudi arabian go in and take the country over and run it.

    December 22, 2011 at 7:55 pm |
  6. reality

    What's so unusual about Muslims killing each other? Does this really surprise anyone? If so, why?

    December 22, 2011 at 7:48 pm |
  7. mikrik13

    Sounds like the kind of place that could use an iron fisted dictator. Oops!

    December 22, 2011 at 7:41 pm |
  8. mikrik

    Sounds like the kind of place that could use an iron fisted dictator. Oops! No one reads a history book in government.

    December 22, 2011 at 7:40 pm |
  9. Chris

    1. Anyone who voted for Bush in 2004 after this mess started; has already proved they are ignorant, and have no place commenting now.
    2. The same people who are complaining about Obama pulling the troops out now are the same people who would have voted Bush in again in 2008 had he been able to run.
    3. Civil war after our occupation was inevitable, read some history war hawks.
    4. Anyone whoever supported this shut up, and blame yourself!

    December 22, 2011 at 7:19 pm |
    • Jon

      Why is everyone calling this civil war? These attacks are perpetrated by al Qaeda, these are TERRORIST ATTACKS, not civil war.

      December 22, 2011 at 8:48 pm |
  10. works4me

    Hey we had our Civil War... let them have theirs! Leave them alone!

    December 22, 2011 at 7:08 pm |
  11. john

    Nothing seems to amaze me ,, pre the invasion 76% of the US public were behind GW to go bomb Iraq ,, and now that the country is basicly destroyed and you killed handreds of thousands of its people the US washed its hands with it, the bleeding hearts come out ,, ahh poor Iraq,,,

    December 22, 2011 at 7:05 pm |
  12. jimzcarz

    What a waste of Life,Time & Dignity.

    December 22, 2011 at 7:02 pm |
  13. reverance

    What is more likely? Circa 2003:

    That Iraq has WMDs and poses a great threat to the United States?

    Or what Ron Paul said—that America was overreacting and we would find ourselves in a quagmire?

    In 2003, everyone said Ron Paul was wrong. In 2011, most Americans agree that Paul was right.

    What is more likely? Circa 2011:

    That Iran might have a WMD and poses a great threat to the United States?

    Or what Ron Paul says—that America is overreacting concerning Iran and going to war with that country will find the US in a quagmire once again?

    The notion that Paul is being “absurd” in his policy toward Iran does not make sense if history, experience and common sense have any bearing on the matter

    December 22, 2011 at 7:01 pm |
  14. Change

    @ JackWagon

    I couldn't have said it any better! But you forgot one thing though! And that is GWB and Dick Cheyney should not be exonerated for the deaths and sufferings that they have brought upon the US and the Iraqi people. Therefore, they should be sent to the ICC in the Hague to be tried for war crimes. O' wait! And we all seemed to have forgotten that GWB murdered Saddam Hussein's two sons in cold blood over lies about these WMD's. So what did this man sons did to America? However, I know that there is a God and GWB and Dick Cheyney and Donald Rumsfeld and Rice and Powell's final days are approaching.

    December 22, 2011 at 7:00 pm |
  15. Josh

    So this is a surprise??? Anyone who envisioned a "democratic" Iraq after the troops pulled out were deluding themselves.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:59 pm |
  16. mullah dadullah

    now,it is not american problem anymore.if they want to kill one another,it is up to them.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:58 pm |
  17. Truthship

    Colin Powell once stated that if America breaks Iraq, America will be required to fix it. Problem is, Bush/Cheney/Powell did not have a clue about the fact is everything that breaks can not be fixed. Don’t complain to me a concern for ‘American safety if civil war erupts ‘. You should just get out of a place you should have never been in to begin with.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
  18. vinny

    Another shining example of why we need to stay away from the Middle East. No matter what, these people will continue to act like its 1000 B.C.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
  19. brad

    They have been killing each other for over 2000 years lol so I couldn't care less we did more than what we should have for those idiots

    December 22, 2011 at 6:52 pm |
  20. Mo Hamhead

    I believe the true purposes behind the U.S. invasion of Iraq and subsequent war had nothing to do with weapons of mass destruction or/and removing a tyrant and creating a democracy.

    I believe the true purposes were, 1) Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld and the military-industrial / prison-industrial / security-surveillance complexes stood to gain billions and, 2) War-mongering Neocons (Wolfowitz, Feith, Wormser, Perle, Greenspan, Rubin, Summers, etc) and AIPAC were working behind the scenes to put a semi-permanent U.S. military base in the Middle East on behalf of Israel.

    Mission Accomplished.

    Now the question is how long before Obama-Biden-Panetta-Hillary succumb to the same nefarious forces and set up camp in Iran...

    December 22, 2011 at 6:51 pm |
  21. mullah dadullah

    start buying scooters,oil is gonna be reeeeaaal expensive.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:50 pm |
  22. Little Tin God

    So why is anyone even remotely surprised by what's happening in Iraq? I predict that it won't be long before Iraq merges with Iran and we then we will REALLY be up the brown creek!

    December 22, 2011 at 6:50 pm |
  23. Beth Warder

    Iran will shortly be in Baghdad to lend assistance in the Sunni/Shia civil war which is now underway.......

    Obama has managed to make the 4500 U.S. deaths, the creation of 4500 widows and 10,000 U.S. orphans, plus 3,000 paraplegics all meaningless.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:44 pm |
    • frag

      It was meaningless ong before Obama came to power! George Bush didn't even know that there were Sunni and Shiite factions in Iraq when he ordered the bombs. This war will go down in history as the greatest political blunder of our time, right in front of Vietnam. Nice move George!

      December 23, 2011 at 2:24 am |
    • p-loc

      I would argue that all of those losses were never anything but LOSSES. There was never the possibility of anything beneficial from their deaths. Every reason that we were given, and every ideal that those men and women died for was never anything but LIES. If you want justice and seek to punish the guilty, it's obvious where to start.

      December 23, 2011 at 5:58 am |
  24. Truthship

    Colin Powell once stated that if America breaks Iraq, America will be required to fix it. Problem is, Bush/Cheney/Powell did not have a clue about the fact is everything that breaks can not be fixed. Don’t tell me a concern for ‘American safety if civil war erupts ‘. Get the hell out of a place you should have never been in to begin with.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:44 pm |
  25. Bill

    This return to chaos was inevitable; these primitive, religiously driven, tribal societies are simply not yet ready for a genuine "democratic" way of life. Whether our troops stayed on for 50 years would only postpone the renewal of full-scale tensions. We should know better than to try to drag them kicking and screaming into the 21st century and a democratic government. Their religion alone essentially precludes that and their traditions of bloodletting are a source of pride. Keep in mind it was they who refused to provide immunity for our forces and resulted in a pullout! This endless bickering and infighting among all these violence-prone factions is the reason they had a dictatorship in place (however cruel and despotic) in order to provide some semblance of order. I hope we learned to give these people wide berth and let them settle their own problems unless we're specifically asked for help.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:33 pm |
  26. Matt

    Wolf, I am just wondering how you suddenly become Iraq expert? What is your motivation? Please explain me that. I think you need to focus on Local issues than Foreign evenets which you are NOT expert.

    Let me tech you few things.

    1. VP of Iraq is paid by Saudi's and indeed he was involved in criminal acts. The president of Iraq has right to question everybody.

    2. Please do not talk about democratic way? First explain me, what bases President Bush attacked Iraq and occupied the country? was it democratic?

    3. He can NOT select defence minister, since it is difficult to trust ex-saddam people. There is so much involved.

    4. Problem created in Iraq is orcheteraited by Saudi's radical elements as well as their leadership which provide money and weapons to create complication in country.

    I would be gratefu, if you stop writing aboit Iraq and Middle east as while, since you are NOT an expert and it is clear that you have motivation and biassed towards a particular country in Middle east. That goes back to three years ago, which you asked first question from President Obama. I am not going to details, but you know what I am talking.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
  27. us1776

    Unfortunate. But no amount of U.S. continued involvement can control these factions.

    This is something that Iraqis have to work out for themselves.

    .

    December 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
  28. travis

    For all of the partisan hacks blaming Obama for leaving Iraq, you should know you are mistaken. The Iraqis refused to extend a status of forces agreement that was signed towards the end of GW's term. The Obama administration pressured the Iraqis to change the SOFA agreement to keep 10-20k American troops in Iraq, but because of political pressure from the Iraqi people the gov't would not extend it. If Obama had chosen to stay without the agreement of the Iraqi gov't it would have been a declaration of war on the NEW Iraqi gov't.
    In the interest of full disclosure, I voted for Obama last time around, and will not be voting for him this time.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
  29. Chris

    How is that early pullout work out for you Democrats? Good job on screwing up yet again.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
    • frag

      Oh, you mean the pullout that was negotiated by George Bush?

      December 23, 2011 at 2:27 am |
    • p-loc

      yeah, only Democrats or republicans have any interest in this. How'd the search for WMD's go? You Repubs still searching? Repubs can pretty much take all the credit for destroying the only secular government of a Muslim majority nation. The government that kept Iran mildly occupied and kept its own Shia/Sunni population from exterminating each other. Sadaam Hussein could well be the definition of "evil", but he was NOT OUR PROBLEM, and wasn't worth trillions of $ and 4500 American lives. 4500 American lives- not Republican or Democrat- AMERICANS.

      December 23, 2011 at 6:11 am |
  30. 1

    I agree with you, Wolf, a hundred percent that civil war in Iraq in the wake of U.S. forces' departure is not only possible but probable given the nature of Arabs and Muslims in general. I should know. I fought them in the Philippines for over 20 years while serving in the military there. If they have a common enemy, chances are they would unite to fight that enemy. But when the foreign intruders are driven out they will fight each other. The Sunnis were powerful In Iraq during Saddam's rule lording it over the Shiites. Now the table is turned and the Shiites will have their revenge. The bombing and shooting has began and will go on until all the Sunnis and the Kurds are killed. So who cares if they kill each other? The good thing is our troops are no longer there. The mullah Muqtada al Sadr is behind the violence. He will not stop until Iraq is turned into a Islamic republic like Iran! Mark my word!

    December 22, 2011 at 6:25 pm |
  31. DENNA

    We are about to find out that we can't make these people do what is right. It is not our job to make them behave civilly. We should NEVER have been there and now pulled out and they're acting like children on a sugar high again. Seriously, all we need to do is protect ourselves and let Iraq figure out how to take care of themselves. Enough! American First!

    December 22, 2011 at 6:21 pm |
  32. JoeT

    In an alternate timeline, the U.S. did not invade Iraq, and Saddam Hussein was brought down by his own people following the Arab Spring. Meanwhile, the U.S. would be $1T richer, 5,000 soldiers would be alive, and countries would respect the US for its restraint and wisdom following 9/11.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:20 pm |
  33. JackWagon

    Iraq is in much worse shape now than before we went there. Why are we not going back in there now? Have we played enough and don't won't to play anymore? Why is it time to stop helping now? They are in worse shape now. We don't want to play anymore? Why not? It changed for the worse since we started it. Why do we go into another country and destroy it and then get enough and come home? Are we very intelligent? Is there intelligent life on this planet?

    December 22, 2011 at 6:16 pm |
  34. JackWagon

    The US wasted lives in Iraq and just created a disaster in the making for that country. They will have a civil war and the winner will be worse than saddam hussein. Saddam was an absurd tyrant but our white picket fence raised genius politicians and decision makers do not seem to understand that the US cannot go into a country like Iraq and create a democracy. Iraq is not ready for a democracy any time soon and may never be unless the US wants to occupy Iraq for eternity. The Iraq war was a stupid, silly, absurd thing for the US to start. Iraq would be in a lot better shape today if Saddam was back in power. There will be someone worse than Saddam that will take his place. Is the US going to go back in now that we have the country in a civiil war? What about when someone much worse than saddam hussein takes over? Are we going to go back and have another Iraq war at that time? Why not? It makes no sense at all.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
    • brian in dc

      Curious, what's your opinion on Libya and Egypt?

      December 22, 2011 at 6:30 pm |
    • Scott

      I agree. Arabs do not think the way that our Constitution allows. Their attitudes and thinking have been ingrained for hundreds of years and if we think they're going to chance, we're the ones that are delusional. Lack of respect, empathy, compassion, law, continuity, and just plain old patriotism does not exists. Arabs have been controlled by a hierarchy that we do not understand. We cannot take over 250 years of American patriotism and "show and tell" how Arabs should do it. It will not work that way. They need to live, breathe, and earn it like we've done it. To them, our law and examples are like pictures and they can only try to emulate them, but unfortunately when the going gets tough, many will run and hide. The bad guys know this.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:56 pm |
    • Tired of the Greed & Stupidity

      No we won't go back and the golden opportunity that was there when W invaded is gone, forever. It's funny/sad that after all these years nobody in charge of our intervention never ever understood the best way to proceed. If greedy stupid people hadn't fixated on the profits Iraq could deliver to them and their companies they could have enhanced our position in the Middle East; as it is however, we have totally screwed up everything so a few people could get wealthy. Hell awaits those who did the evil things, at least I hope so...

      December 22, 2011 at 6:58 pm |
    • RusTnuts

      Mission accomplished! Good thing the us got all those WMD's out of there.

      December 22, 2011 at 7:31 pm |
    • Vieteran

      Amen!!

      December 22, 2011 at 7:55 pm |
  35. pink hippo

    I think that country was better off when Saddam was running it.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:05 pm |
    • DENNA

      You might have a valid point. If George Bush hadn't had a vendetta against Saddam, we would NEVER had been there. Our military did all they could to stabilize Iraq before they pulled out, but we cannot hold their hands forever.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:26 pm |
    • brian in dc

      So do all the people they found in the mass graves.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
    • Matt

      I guess you will say next that Hilter was on power we are were better off. Your comment is just meaningless.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
      • p-loc

        Hitler was a threat to the entire world. He had the means and will to spread Germany's borders globally. He demonstrated this by OCCUPYING ALL OF EASTERN EUROPE. Sadaam Hussein didn't have a cup to piss in after Kuwait. His loony rants were used to maintain his internal power structure. All his external aggression had previously targeted Iran, which currently has no antagonists bordering them.

        December 23, 2011 at 6:23 am |
    • Ronald

      Unfortunately, you are correct.

      December 22, 2011 at 7:37 pm |
  36. bawana

    should not have ever been there in the 1st place,,,rove and bush should be real proud of the chasm that was created by this false war,,and i don't blame the shia for exacting revenge on the sunni after nearly 500 odd years of tyranical rule by the sunni's over the shia and the kurds dating back from the ottoman empire

    December 22, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
  37. Patti

    Wolf I am shocked at you and Ron Brownstein who I assume are both jewish. Why do you defend obama he seems to treat Israel as a common threat. Read blogs that I see the Democrats are ready to throw Israel into the Dead Sea, Republicans defend Israel. Wake up! Obama ignoring BiBi, cutting Israel back to the 67 borders. and ignoring Iran who threatens Israel. Wolf now I can see why you lost on Jeopardy.

    December 22, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
    • p-loc

      They are a wild-card nuclear power (never signed a non-proliferation treaty), and definitely a potential threat to world peace. Oh wait, they won't even acknowledge that they are a nuclear super power. Maybe it's because the CIA alleged that Israel STOLE technology/enriched uranium from the USA in the mid 60's? Awesome "ally"

      December 23, 2011 at 7:03 am |
  38. NOGR8RH8R

    Gee, 48 hours after we leave and there's CHAOS. Surprise.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
    • DENNA

      No real surprise. That entire area seems to thrive on conflict. At least our soldiers are no longer in harms way.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:28 pm |
    • brian in dc

      Well, when you announce to the world when you're cutting ties years in advance the perps get a jump start on planning.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:32 pm |
  39. Wes

    It is sad that we Americans were so blinded by the events of 9/11 that we could not see the comparison between the war in Iraq and the Vietnam War (of which I am a veteran). How many "let's remake this region in our image" failures do we need to learn to stay the "h' out of places like this? What huge waste!

    December 22, 2011 at 5:53 pm |
    • Bob

      I guess that you were "blind" when you fought in nam, eh? as for iraq, you can thank both george bush senior and junior for those wars... btw, i am a vet of 3 wars, and got out in protest of the 2nd iraq war. what's your excuse?

      December 22, 2011 at 6:36 pm |
  40. BA

    I guess you will censor my comment again CNN since it doesn't conform to your corporate related agenda. All of this stuff happening in Iraq was predicted by Colin Powell before our invasion even took place. We went to the country under false pretenses and now we have the largest embassy in the world in a country that we killed tens of thousands of people. If the Iraqi prime minister is in charge and an arrest warrant was issued for the vice-president how is it that a so called news journalist name Wolf Blizter can criticize whether he is acting as a democratic leader or not. Where is the ctiticism of Saudi Arabia, Wolf. Heck they cut a woman head off for allegedly practicing sorcery, yet not a word from the MSM. I want real journalism, not paid for journalism.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
    • Truthship

      Well said. Ditto that !

      December 22, 2011 at 7:00 pm |
    • Beverly NC

      I totally agree with you. I knew this whole Iraq war was a total lie when I saw Colin Powell presenting our need to attack Iraq to the UN. I have admired and watched Colin Powell for a long time and I looked at his face and saw a man falling on his sword based on orders from President Bush. Saudi Arabia was the nation that attacked us. Osama was a son of the Saudi Royal family. So why did we do nothing to Saudi Arabia? – because the Bush family and the Saudi Royal family had been friends for decades so Bush had to find someone else to blame it on. It was a total fraud. it was both a domestic crime lying to Congress, knowingly presenting false data, lying to the UN, and commiting international war crimes on torture. I still think Bush and Cheney need to be dropped off at the Hague and the Dutch told to try them for the war criminals they are. That would be justice for Iraq and for the thousands of soldiiers they murdered and innocent Iraqis slaughtered. Thye brought shame on America and made us even more of a target for terrorists for this lie of a war. Wolf – you used to be a good reporter – when did you become a Republican devoid of reality?

      December 22, 2011 at 7:11 pm |
      • p-loc

        great post, Beverly. Thank you.

        December 23, 2011 at 7:06 am |
  41. TOMCLEMENTS

    Our military leaders urged Obama not to send everyone home. The Iraq gov. did not support our leaving. The region was not left in good hands. Thanks O....

    December 22, 2011 at 5:51 pm |
    • yuri pelham

      Yup. We should have stayed til year 2222 and bankrupted the USA. The Iraqis were quite confused going after the vice president for terrorism. He lives in Washington and his name is Cheney.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:09 pm |
    • travis

      Sorry Tom, this is either a total misunderstanding of the events or an outright lie. The Obama administration pressured the Iraqis to change the Status of Forces agreement that expired this much. Obama was trying to get the Iraqis to agree to 10-15k troops remaining in Iraq. The gov't of Iraq declined, so Obama had no choice but to remove all combat personnel. I was in Iraq until November of this year. I worked with, and talked to Iraqi's and Americans about this. For the record, I worked almost exclusively with Sunni Iraqi's, and 90% of them expected their country to fall apart again after we left.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
    • George

      You don't know what you're talking about. They threw us out of the country. They don't even want the 3000 troops that we left behind there.

      December 22, 2011 at 7:11 pm |
    • Beverly NC

      Stop watching FOX. BUSH is the one who agreed to have ALL troops out of Iraq by the end of 2011 and the leader of Iraq told us to get out. He told President Obama we were no longer welcome, our soldiers would not be protected and would be arrested if any Iraqii was killed. Besides 10 years of a war that was a total lie isn't enough for you? 4500 American soldiers murdered by the Bush and Cheney lie. Hundreds of thousands of innocents Iraqis killed for a lie. It was past time to end this shame and end this giant waste of our money. You care so much – you go to Iraq.

      December 22, 2011 at 7:16 pm |
    • Mark

      The Iraq government didn't support us leaving? I must have missed it.

      December 22, 2011 at 7:31 pm |
  42. A keen observer

    All Bush's war did was to destablize the Middle East by changing the balance of power! It won't be long before Iraq becomes a dictatorship again. A popular refrain should be: Cheney lied and people died.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
  43. Victor Conte

    Why does the U.S. continue to get involved with Islamic countries? Trump is not one of the most liked characters out there, but he did have a point. They dont like us, they dont appreciate us and once we help with their need, the situation gets 100 times worse. Whether it was ok or bad, Sadamm did not let these things get out of control.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:46 pm |
    • DENNA

      Again pointing out that we should NOT have been there. I hope we learn to mind our own business and only intervene when our interests are threatened. We simply cannot control the world. Yes, we did some good in all this and our troops behave admirably, but we must choose our battles more carefully.

      December 22, 2011 at 6:31 pm |
  44. csnord

    You mean that after all the nice things the US did to bring democracy, peace, and stability to Iraq, the Shi'ites and Sunnis STILL want to beat the stuffing out of each other now that the adult supervision is gone? No. Really? Say it isn't so. Surely our intervention and demonstration of "The American Way" would have been a sufficiently clear demonstration of a better way of life that they would change their ways.

    ...OK. End of sarcasm.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
  45. Lisa

    Did anyone not see this coming? We insisted the Iraqis for our choice for leader - rather than letting them decide who will lead them. We may not have liked their decision but, really, when has it ever worked out for us when we select who should be in charge of another country (see Shah, Noriega, Marcos, etc.)

    Hopefully, we will NOT be sending troops back to Iraq and will finally let them handle their internal affairs themselves.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
  46. joey

    no kiddin, who woulda thunk it

    December 22, 2011 at 5:38 pm |
  47. phil

    did you really expect anything different. Those people have been fighting for centuries, and religious factions have been killing each other without concern. The mnoney we wasted and men whom were killed and wounder is useless, as Bush sstarted a useless war, making Cheney wealthy along with other suppliers. Will same thing happen in Afganistsan? Sure will Isn't it shame only way country can be half way prosperous is to kll and maim our young in senseless wars. By the way, it only took sixity years to make Korea a viable economic entitiy. And, I'm a veteran

    December 22, 2011 at 5:37 pm |
  48. Mi Poo

    Colin Powell warned Bush and friends about Iraq – if they broke it, they've bought it. Well, they definitely broke it. Send W and Cheney over to sit down and "visit" with them. I'm sure it's all just a big misunderstanding.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:26 pm |
  49. Tatsit

    We never should have went to war with Iraq with out a decleration of war from congress. Look at the mess we made, I am not saying Sadamm was a great guy by all means....but the people of Iraq were better off it seams.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:24 pm |
  50. Brahaha

    It seems to me that we have wasted our blood and treasure for nothing. I don't think Shia government of Iraq will be able to successfully stabilize the country unless it works invites the sunni minority. I would be surprised if Saudi Arabia and Kuwait sit the sidelines while the Shia's continue they onslaught.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:22 pm |
  51. Frances Kelly

    Mr. Blitzer. I hear you over and over referring to people who WORK for a living, people for whom that $1000. tax cut, as "middle class"..... For the middle class, $1000. might be an annoyance- but for those people who work pretty much pay check to pay check, you and all who say "middle class" about them are incorrect. There is nothing wrong with being "WORKING CLASS".... Please use the correct term to refer to those people who work, and need every cent of their paycheck to live– who save a minimal amount- middle class denotes ownership of property, a small business, etc. Remember the French Revolution? the "bourgeois" – were the ¨middle class - the peasants were the working
    class. Americans like to pretend– but these people who need this break are our working class, and we should call them what they are. Thank you.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  52. Dar

    At least 69 are dead in
    Baghdad today as a result of 16 coordinated car bombs, roadside blasts and sticky bombs. One
    was identified as a suicide bomb. It is believed that al-Qaida is responsible, and the actions are
    connected to the end of American military presence.

    Ron Paul Must Be Proud. This is the way that Paul thinks, Let them kill each other, who cares right, Right???
    Try being the mother of a child that was just blown up by someone who now has the upper hand because we left that mothers child unprotected by letting the Iraq goverment think they were ok now.
    Not only did we give full rein to the efing terrorist to come marching back in but we gave the the date to start their bombing. WAY to go OBAMA, you peice of dung.
    We didnt just go to Iraq to find WMD's, we went their to liberate the people and now we have all but sealed their death certificates by leaving them alone.
    Is this is what our men and woman in our armed services went there for? So Iraq could be open game for killers to do their thing. I think NOT but OBAMA and Ron Paul sure dont care about the life of others do they.
    i mean, as long as it doesnt happen here in the USA, who cares.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
    • Mark

      Surely you know the date was negotiated by President Bush? And would you have supported tax increases in order to pay for ongoing military missions in Iraq or anywhere else? And do you think the Republicans in Congress would have supported tax increases in order to pay off the war debt we've incurred? They haven't yet, why would they now?

      December 22, 2011 at 7:34 pm |
    • p-loc

      terrorizers weren't there before we arrived. Sadaam didn't put up with that crap. Terrorizing was his monopoly. He also didn't suffer the foolishness of religious kooks...Iraq was a secular government before we "liberated" them. Do your homework.

      December 23, 2011 at 7:16 am |
  53. Kevin Collins

    The fact of the matter is that the U.S. could stay there another 10 years and it wouldn't make any difference. Iraq should've never been illegally and unnecessarily invaded and occupied in the first place; a civil war is inevitable. The only ones who want our military still there are the defense contractors and the politicians in their pockets.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:21 pm |
  54. Richard Hode

    So who cares? It's the Iraqis' country – let them kill each other to their hearts' delight if they want to. When they get tired of killing each other they'll stop. Why is it any business of ours what they do with each other? A plague on all their houses.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:16 pm |
  55. geesam47

    Looks like our CIA did another wonderful job of learning the obvious.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  56. F

    Blitzer, let's hope the Iraqis get rid of American influence in Iraq and establish a soverign country free of US/Israeli hegemony. This is more important than anything else.

    December 22, 2011 at 5:12 pm |
  57. gg

    Iragis forces are lazy...period.

    December 22, 2011 at 4:58 pm |
  58. Willie Floyd

    In 2007 V.Pres. Biden had a bill with 70+ signatures-both Dem. & Rep.-that GWB ignored and let lay on his desk. Don't know if anyone remembers or not but it was to separate the 3 groups and concentrated on the division of oil revenues. I'm going to Google and try to find details that I've forgotten. He also emphasized in one debate-I think Chas., SC, that our emphasis should be on Pakistan. No one seemed to listen then either.

    December 22, 2011 at 4:53 pm |

Post a comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.