Even our own officials visit Baghdad unannounced out of fear.
2007-01-09
05:12:13
·
11 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
P.S. Iraq is not a "War" zone. It's an "Occupation" zone. The Iraqi Army was defeated 3 years ago.
2007-01-09
05:24:54 ·
update #1
askthepizzaguy -
Once again, you are dead wrong. NYC is the safest large city in the US. The FBI says so....
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-09-19-city-crimerates_x.htm
Now apologize to us New Yorkers like a man.
2007-01-09
05:30:50 ·
update #2
askthepizzaguy -
Insults and race-baiting. Nice!
2007-01-09
05:40:47 ·
update #3
Thank you for the added detail that clears the distinction between a war zone and an occupied country.
To answer your question, the troops cannot leave the green zone let alone the reporters. Mind you, the Conservatives will tell you we are winning in Iraq. Ever heard such rubbish?
2007-01-09 05:29:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
That's not true. First of all, they are embedded with soldiers so reporters and bloggers are in the "Red Zone" all the time. Second, we have MWR visits all the time. NFL Cheerleaders, Kid Rock, and WWE Wrestlers and entourage just to name a few. It's safe enough for them to visit and move around.
Probably, what used to be one of the most dangerous roads in Baghdad is now one of the safest and that's the infamous, "Route Irish". It's the road that leads from BIAP (Baghdad Internations Airport) to the Green Zone. We travel it all the time and there have been very few incidences.
I wouldn't vacation here, yet, but it's only bad in some places...
2007-01-09 05:21:58
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
They already coated it formerly. What they at the instant are not doing is pre-empting their known "opinion journalism" shows to loop the comparable pictures repeatedly back like a school artwork action picture undertaking. that's fantastic with me, I hate it while they try this. On ANY CHANNEL. Frankly, I became it to Larry King on CNN formerly, and....whoa, no Troop pictures! He replaced into speaking with regard to the mosque undertaking too! With Russell Simmons! speaking approximately mosques with rap moguls is extra significant than the troops leaving Iraq?!?!?!??!GASP! heavily, extra information stations would desire to quit displaying the comparable undertaking repeatedly and over with out new information repeatedly. It jogs my memory of MTV interior the Eighteen Nineties while the comparable stupid rap video could come on each 40 5 minutes, and that's while the diverse video clips have been getting "epic" and stretching out to what regarded like 10 minutes. Yeah, permit's wish FOX AND CNN avert that traditionally. EDIT: I observe JSmooth in simple terms reported an common fact approximately Greta overlaying the tale, and he had 9 thumbs up..and *8* thumbs down. what's all the thumbs down for, pinkos? Why are there this manner of super form of liars in this "question"...? I nevertheless see lots of solutions pretending Fox did not conceal and each so often changing the priority completely, even regardless of the incontrovertible fact that lots of visitors mentioned that they had already. so as that isn't lack of expertise, that's mendacity. assume your viewpoint is fact, lie, and then substitute the priority completely. So basic.
2016-10-30 10:48:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Some of them do, although it seems that they choose non-American reporters. Maybe that's to reduce the risk of an attack on them.
I watch CNN, and most of the time, you'll get an Iraq report from a British reporter, who usually report for CNN International. Yes, it could just be because England is closer to Iraq than the U.S. is, but I also wonder if it's similar to the advice given to Americans who travel overseas to carry a Canadian flag, because if you're targeted, they'll think you're a Canadian, and won't hurt you (as much).
2007-01-09 05:26:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by amg503 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's no walk in the park, but getting better despite the efforts of some in Iraq and even here at home. Even celebrities make visits there offering support. I know that is an unknown concept but it still exists. Even the guys in the link have been making regular visits.
2007-01-09 05:26:29
·
answer #5
·
answered by Rich B 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I hear that celebrities can't visit New York city unless it is with an armed escort and a bulletproof limousine.
Our own officials have to worry about snipers and pipe bombs ANYWHERE, not just Baghdad, which is still in a state of emergency.
What an ignorant question. Ali G, have you done anything besides smoke pot and complain your entire life? You can hit me with some racist anti-white insult now.
Never said New York wasn't a fairly safe large city. However, there are plenty of murders committed there, and it doesn't negate from the fact that people of wealth or fame ALWAYS surround themselves with security when visiting there.
Now apologize to everyone for being a jackass, like a man.
2007-01-09 05:17:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by askthepizzaguy 4
·
1⤊
3⤋
Really, what good news is there in Iraq at the moment that the Media shows on television?
2007-01-09 05:19:50
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
why is 80% of the country stable then? why has their economy increased by 400% since the official end of the fighting against saddam Hussein? anyone who tries saying there is a civil war does not understand what they are and the severity of true wars.
2007-01-09 05:18:51
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Hmmmm, it's called a war zone. Unlike Vietnam, where the gooks would stop shooting so Conkrite could spew their propaganda, the muzzies don't give a crap and will kill liberals also.
2007-01-09 05:16:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by pelosi_hair_ball 1
·
2⤊
4⤋
Sadly yes, it is true. Iraq is a quagmire.
2007-01-09 05:19:21
·
answer #10
·
answered by hgheartland 2
·
1⤊
2⤋