January 11th, 2014
08:00 AM ET

Why Iraq is in turmoil

Watch "Fareed Zakaria GPS," Sundays at 10 a.m. and 1 p.m. ET on CNN

By Fareed Zakaria

Here's a startling statistic: more than 8,000 Iraqis were killed in violent attacks in 2013. That makes it the second most violent country in the world, after its neighbor Syria.

As violence has spread and militants have gained ground in several Middle Eastern countries, people have been wondering how much this has to do with the Obama administration and its lack of an active intervention in the region. The Wall Street Journal and a Commentary magazine opinion piece have both argued this past week that the Obama administration's decision to withdraw troops from Iraq is directly responsible for the renewed violence in that country. They and others have also argued that because it has stayed out of Syria, things there have spiraled downward.

Let me suggest that the single greatest burden for the violence and tensions across the Arab world lies with a president – though not President Obama – and it lies with an American foreign policy that was not too passive but rather too active and interventionist in the Middle East. The invasion and occupation of Iraq triggered what has become a regional religious war in the Middle East. Let me explain how, specifically.

From March through June of 2003, in the first months of the occupation of Iraq, the Bush administration made a series of catastrophic decisions. It authorized the disbanding of the Iraqi army and signed onto a policy of deBaathification, which meant that anyone in Iraq who had been a member of the top four levels of the Baath Party – the ruling party under Saddam Hussein – would be barred from holding any government job.

This meant that tens of thousands of bureaucrats and hundreds of thousands of soldiers – almost all Sunnis – were thrown out of work, angry, disposed, and armed. This in turn meant the collapse of the Iraqi state and of political order. But it also sparked the rise of a sectarian struggle that persists to this day.

More from CNN: Can Iraq ever escape cycle of violence?

The Bush administration went to war in Iraq to spread democracy. But in fact it spread sectarianism – displacing the Sunni elite who had long ruled the country and replacing it with hardline Shia religious parties that used their new found power to repress the Sunnis – just as they had been repressed.

Meanwhile, Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has been utterly unwilling to share power with the Sunnis – who comprise about 20 percent of Iraq – and that has driven them into opposition, extremism, and terrorism. During the surge the prime minister made several promises to change his ways and over the last few years has reneged on every one of them.

This sectarian power-struggle is the origins of the civil war that has been ongoing in Iraq for 11 years. It is the cancer that has spread beyond Iraq into other countries, from Syria to Lebanon.

The Bush administration seemed to have made the massive strategic error almost unthinkingly. There is for example a report that a few months before the invasion, President Bush met with three Iraqi exiles and appeared unaware that Iraq contained within it Sunnis and Shias. An Arab leader confirmed to me that in his meetings with the president, it was clear that Bush did not understand that there was a difference between the two sects. Others in the administration, better informed, were convinced that the Shia would be pluralists and democrats. Those of us who warned of these dangers at the time were dismissed as pessimists.

So if we're trying to understand why we see a Sunni-Shia battle unfolding across the Middle East, keep in mind that the primary cause is not that the Obama administration didn't intervene in Syria. It's because the Bush administration did in Iraq.

Post by:
Topics: Fareed's Take • Iraq • Middle East • Religion

soundoff (454 Responses)
  1. burt

    This article is disgusting. This dude is saying "I told you so" on all the violence in Iraq. Please... Iraq was going to unravel like Yougoslavia no matter what the US did.

    January 12, 2014 at 7:56 am | Reply
  2. Silverado

    Instead of de-Baathification, try de-Islamification. That will be very effective and will fix the problem.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:03 am | Reply
    • Mitt morran

      Bettr yet is De-Americanization. That fix not just the ME problem, but the world problem.

      January 12, 2014 at 10:50 am | Reply
      • Islam4fools

        If you don't like to read, watch the video.

        He is saying 'lack of American intervention', meaning US is not getting involved.

        It is just disciples of pedophile prophet Mohammed who married a child named Aisha are violently killing one another.

        January 12, 2014 at 11:16 am |
      • minnie mouse

        De-Americanize the world to solve all its problems? Really. You mean like the "peaceful world" between Iraq and its neighbor Kuwait when Saddam's Iraq invaded it, killing its neighbors and plundering its oil fields? Or do you mean the "peaceful world" where the old Iraqi government gassed its own citizen Kurds, children and all? Or do you mean the "peaceful world" where radical Islamists attacked the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001, and incinerated my college boyfriend at his desk on the 96th floor as he was working as a bond trader? Or do you mean the "peaceful world" with Russians in Afghanistan and bin Laden oozing over from Saudi Arabia?. Or do you mean the "peaceful world" when Soviets placed nuclear weapons in Cuba half-way around the world from itself and swimming distance from American shores? Or do you mean the "peaceful world" where muslims were lined up in clusters and mass assassinated in Croatia? Or do you mean the "peaceful world" where German Nazis incinerated 6,000,000+ Jewish women, children, and grandparents?

        January 12, 2014 at 2:58 pm |
    • Mitt morran

      It should be De-Americanization. That fix not just the ME problem, but the world problems.

      January 12, 2014 at 10:51 am | Reply
      • John Geheran

        Thank you, Mitt. I couldn't have said it better!

        January 12, 2014 at 12:15 pm |
      • CALiberal

        You are so right. Saddam, the brutal dictator, had the place under control. Saddam also had Iran under control and in a box. Since we eliminated him the place has gone wild. The Mideast is full of brutal dictators, if you haven't noticed, and Saddam was one of them. We shouldn't invade countries that we don't understand and aren't any threat to us.

        January 12, 2014 at 12:28 pm |
    • CALiberal

      That would be like trying to eliminate all the Christians in America. Wouldn't work. Would be very unpopular.

      January 12, 2014 at 12:20 pm | Reply
  3. burt

    This article is disgusting. This dude is saying "I told you so" on all the violence in Iraq. Please... Iraq was going to unravel like Yugoslavia no matter what the US did.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:09 am | Reply
    • VR

      And how do you know Iraq was unraveling?

      January 12, 2014 at 9:13 am | Reply
      • john.deatherage

        because it is the 2nd most dangerous country in the world (2nd only to Syria)....

        January 12, 2014 at 9:34 am |
    • Robert Takeuchi

      Fareed is too biased to be an average journalist, commentator, and analysts. Foremost, to have a program over the airwaves. I will try diligently to oust him by contacting the sponsors. Not, the management of CNN...They are more biased than Fareed. How does he exist with all of his negativities. He lives in USA, and really become one of the most outspoken forces in corroding this wonderful country. ACTION AGAINST HIM IS UNDERWAY. I PROMISE.

      January 12, 2014 at 10:24 am | Reply
      • Bravesfandp

        I am sure he is in FEAR of this- BOBBY BOY!

        January 12, 2014 at 12:10 pm |
    • minnie mouse

      Islamists are "too special" to take self-responsibility for decisions they make and actions they choose. So their actions are always "somebody else's fault"..... The-Devil-Made-Them-Do-It disease. As a result, they are always enraged because they consider themselves too special to suffer the inevitable and guaranteed ramifications of their own choices. When dictator Saddam was removed, obviously it leaves a vacuum. So would the author of this article prefer a continued dictatorship instead? (Iraqi-invaded Kuwait might not agree.) And following Saddam's exit, Iraqis had the choice to form collaborative team relationships among tense faction interests, and build a new dictator-free government and country. Instead, Iraqis [and invasive regional foreign interests taking advantage of the Saddam vacuum in the neighborhood] chose the option of power struggles, control battles, and death. But stop blaming their choices on somebody else. When the Americans eliminated the British crown from our government circa 1780, we did not then choose continual battles and bloodshed with each other for the next decade. (And there were many pro-British americans who could have chosen that option had they desired power/bloodshed over Unity and new beginnings.) We didn't pit American against American against American in those precious and precarious first raw years. We saw our chance at a new opportunity and did the best we could. Imperfect as we fully realize we are. I want this for the people of Iraq. I am only one small person on a huge globe. I want to share coaches for our Olympic teams. I want to exchange high school students and invite them into my home. I want to complain about Iraq charging us too much for oil yet we buy it anyway. I want to be friends. I want there to be peace in Iraq.

      January 12, 2014 at 11:01 am | Reply
  4. burt

    Typical liberals out here commenting.... Always calling others dumb or pointing out mistakes but offering no real ideas or solutions. So tell me where would the middle east be today if Sadaam was still in power? Do any of you folks really think we could have avoided never having a war with Sadaam? Dude was going to build his army up and start another war. Maybe with Iran or Syria or Saudi Arabia – either way he was trouble and needed to be removed. And yes he did have chemical weapons that he would have used.... In fact – isn't Gulf War Syndrome linked to exposure to Sarin gas.... Think about it.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:20 am | Reply
    • CONLIB

      Typical conservative,talk actual facts and is all you do is get politically offended an end up protecting of all ppl GB- the moron that blew it harder than every president in history on all fronts- abroad and home. Tool

      January 12, 2014 at 9:42 am | Reply
      • george fallon

        It is all conjecture. It is his opinion based on his analysis of the recent history. I disagree to the extent that these areas are tribal. Tribal in the sense that while we look at this from a global perspective the people on the ground are fighting territorial and religious battles. These are more primitive cultures and our way of life is asymmetrical with theirs. We do not belong there.

        January 12, 2014 at 10:47 am |
    • Name*alan

      Hate to say it but debaathing Iraq was a huge huge mistake and it did lead to secularian violence.

      January 12, 2014 at 10:12 am | Reply
      • minnie mouse

        Iraq made the choice to lead themselves to secular violence rather than to a collaborative new government team. The good news is that these unfortunate decisions can be reversed.

        January 12, 2014 at 8:27 pm |
  5. George

    It ultimately boils down to, well, they shouldn't have attacked the U.S. on 9/11/2001 and then none of this would be happening now.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:27 am | Reply
    • Josh

      @George: You do understand that Iraq didn't attack us on 9/11 right?

      January 12, 2014 at 8:37 am | Reply
    • Robert Takeuchi

      WHY NOT TRY TO BE THE ORIGINAL RESPECTABLE NEWS ORGANIZATION....rather than becoming a negative spewing
      disease and hiring and airing nothing but ridiculous commentators, and analysts. Start reading the news. We don't require your negative comments on all subject relating to you hate. This does not promote viewers...all it does is ousting previous viewers that felt CNN was a very respectable station for a very long time. Why try to compete with MSNBC with your negativities. We can get all of the foul, biased, and uneducated crap from MSNBC. Get rid of Fareed and all of his comrades from a very once-upon-a-time prominent news network. Your rating sucks real bad...Why? Dummies.

      January 12, 2014 at 10:33 am | Reply
      • Bravesfandp

        Let me guess- Fox is your idea of a "credible" news source- HA!!!!

        January 12, 2014 at 12:13 pm |
  6. George

    The real secret agenda was and is to insure instability and turmoil in the Islamic world so the rest of us can go on living in the 21st century.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:29 am | Reply
  7. Garner Foley

    We should have dealt with Saddam in Iraq as we did with Muramarin Libya and not destroyed the existing order. We were both ignorant and holier-than-thouunder W Bush. Now we reap the wind.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:32 am | Reply
  8. hypocriteconfronter

    How original. Now that we've blamed Bush, we can absolve Obama of any obligation to address it. Let the next Republican president worry about the Middle East.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:36 am | Reply
    • Josh

      The Iraqi government made its bed when it insisted upon a force agreement that put US troops under Iraqi law which Obama, rightfully, refused to do.

      January 12, 2014 at 8:42 am | Reply
    • WAB


      January 12, 2014 at 9:51 am | Reply
    • Bravesfandp

      No, we cannot wait that long- that is for the next Republican President, considering the state of the Republican party (it's going to be a long time buddy)!

      January 12, 2014 at 12:17 pm | Reply
  9. Larry

    These are the SAME people as the Palestinians., crude, rude and love only "Death and revenge". The Middle East Muslims continue to kill Christians and Jews just because they are not Muslim. We should NOT lift a finger to help any Muslim country there because it will just come back to bite us.

    January 12, 2014 at 8:52 am | Reply
    • ygreedy

      Actually the largest concentration of Christians are in Lebanon and Palestine,and they are Arabs.
      Palestinians are not fighting because of religous hatred.They are fighting because Israel expelled them from their land,but certainly makes it easier to hate them with your way of thinking.
      The Christian arabs I know have little sympathy for Israel.

      ps:before anyone goes on a rant about how they didn`t exist,or palestinians are a made up people learn a little history.Palestinians are mentioned in the Byzintine era,and before.Only America supports Israels "settlements",and religous right to ownership based on the bible.
      Look at all the U.N. resolutions Isrel has ignored.Half as many as Sadam.

      January 12, 2014 at 10:17 am | Reply
      • minnie mouse

        .... speaking of rants ....

        January 12, 2014 at 2:20 pm |
  10. jashembaish

    Hahahahahaha....its Bush's fault. Didn't see that one coming. Typical libs

    January 12, 2014 at 8:55 am | Reply
  11. ygreddy

    After reading the comments either the Fake news channels paid posters have too much extra time,or some of these people are seeking emplotement there.
    I mean it`s like facts don`t exist.......just peoples ignorance of the situation,and who is involved,and who started this whole mess to begin with.
    Imagine sitting down with reps from Iraq and you know absolutey NOTHING about them,their religion,or their country except you invaded it.

    January 12, 2014 at 9:19 am | Reply
  12. shaveandahaircut@hotmail.com

    Oh yeah....because of 911.....even though NO ONE from Iraq participated.

    It`s hard to imagine people are just so hateful,and ignorant.But then again this is how,and why all this took place.And just like W`s father said Iraq fragmeted and tumbled into turmoil draging it`s neighbors with them.Not to mention trillions of U.S. dollars.

    January 12, 2014 at 9:23 am | Reply
    • minnie mouse

      .... Iraq "tumbled into turmoil"....??? Are you implying that Iraq was some kind of weak, rolling, tumbling, fumbling thing that possessed zero ability of foresight? -or- had no control over itself? -or- had no control over its choice of actions? -or- was without any ability to predict possible outcomes of its assorted choices? How insulting it is to say that about Iraq. You owe them an apology.

      January 12, 2014 at 8:19 pm | Reply
  13. john.deatherage

    Ah, the classic "it is Bushes fault".... Let me posit a different theory. The middle east has been screwed up since WW1. Nothing we did or didn't do really changed that basic fact. We should view our recent boom in domestic energy production as an opportunity exit the Middle East both militarily and foreign policy.

    January 12, 2014 at 9:37 am | Reply
    • ygreedy

      Different theory?More like an ostrich with it`s head in the sand.....

      W screwed up....the right still goes along with it....so lets just say "so what it was already screwed up".....great theory.
      Unfortunately the facts are not supporting you:Bush lied about Iraq.Lied about their involvement in 911 even though he recanted AFTER the invansion.He lied about WMD......he messed up on a grand scale.So grand it affects many countires,and hundreds of miliions of Americans,and will for many many more years.

      Now you can stick your head back in the sand.....

      January 12, 2014 at 9:51 am | Reply
  14. Scott

    Shia vs. Sunni conflict started after the murder of the 4th Caliph more than 1000 years ago. The conflict has nothing to do with Bush or Obama. This is an intra-Islamic war.

    January 12, 2014 at 9:47 am | Reply
    • ygreedy

      From big picture to small picture.
      Specifically talking about Iraq.Our unlawful,and morally wrong invasion under false pretenses allowed Iraq to decend into the mess it is now.Simplistic statements wont change that.
      Not to mention the mis-handling after "Mission Accomplished"..plane loads of cash disappears.Planeloads of weapons disappear.
      I do remember George senior stating that the removal of Sadam by means of war would fragment the country and allow the mess we have now.....he said this in reply to the right wanting him to take out Sadam in the gulf war 1.
      AND guess he was right(no pun intended).....
      But please wingers lets not let facts get in the way of winger reality.

      January 12, 2014 at 10:03 am | Reply
      • minnie mouse

        Blamers Blame – Doers Do.

        January 12, 2014 at 1:42 pm |
  15. Choon Bong Lee

    America! You should be ashamed to have voted for a bum like Bush not once but twice.
    It is not Bush's fault. It is your fault. Blood is in your hands. You allowed him to make a mess in Iraq.

    January 12, 2014 at 9:49 am | Reply
    • ✠RZ✠

      There is indeed much wrong and enough shame to go all around. The last few decades, at least, has clearly brought about many events, some being extremely violent, with the who and how of governing a country and role of global powers. The challenge for nations to somehow wrestle back control of their government, and maintain control if they can, seems to be virtually impossible. Only when violence, hatred, greed, aggression, and injustice come to a halt everywhere will we have any chance to move forward peacefully as a nation, and a world.

      January 12, 2014 at 11:04 am | Reply
    • Bravesfandp

      Believe me, there are a few of us that didn't vote for that BOZO once let alone twice. You are right, America is reaping what it has sown and trying to blame Obama for it everyday!

      January 12, 2014 at 12:21 pm | Reply
    • minnie mouse

      I guess that September 11 thing made Americans a little moody. Go figure.

      January 12, 2014 at 2:14 pm | Reply
    • minnie mouse

      Blamers blame – Doers do.

      January 12, 2014 at 2:17 pm | Reply
  16. chris bern

    the middle east is like good mozzarella cheese, its all about the kurds

    January 12, 2014 at 10:15 am | Reply
  17. Danko

    Didn't you support intervention Fareed?

    January 12, 2014 at 10:16 am | Reply
  18. MG

    Maybe we should have never gone to war in Iraq but the fact is that we did. Nothing we can do about that regardless if think we did the right thing or not it doesn't matter. When you are a soldier, politics should fly out the window and the only thing you do in war is the right thing, which is the accomplishment of the mission. Didn't we do that in Iraq? We accomplished our mission. People in Iraq were happy and grateful for our presence in their country to include soldiers from the former Iraqi Army. Our mistake was leaving them without the proper tools and knowledge to control and secure their borders. Did we leave Germany after WWII to handle their problem on their own? We occupied Germany even until now. How about Panama in 1989? we stayed in those countries and build relationships and helped them in order for us to ensure that we never go back to war with them again. Our current Administration only cared about withdrawing the troops and look good in the eyes of many who don't understand why we serve in the armed forces. Our current administration left a door open for terrorist to enter that country and ruined the work and progress we made. If this war was a mistake then what we should have done was to visualize our success and make the necessary goals to accomplish them. Isn't that what we do when we make a mistake? We can't change the past but we can have a successful future. Supporting our troops and their mission should be the number one priorities for those politicians serving in the white house. Quitting on the mission or the task at hand is a sign of weakness.

    January 12, 2014 at 10:24 am | Reply
    • wakeupAmerica

      Your comment makes sense only if America is a rich, powerful, wise nation, with plenty of extra/spare resources to sort out major issues in other countries. The fact is, we are not, anymore. America has become a nation with a huge unemployment problem, a huge debt problem, a huge drug problem, a huge dysfunctional politics problem, to mention just a few.

      January 12, 2014 at 11:55 am | Reply
      • minnie mouse

        Sounds bad. Until you look at most other large nations. So your theory is that America is "too poor" currently to be devoting large funding for its military? How expensive do you suppose it might become to find yourself in Second Place vis-à-vis military? That is one category that we must always fund well. No exceptions to that rule.

        January 12, 2014 at 1:55 pm |
  19. Skorpio

    The global violence common denominator is ISLAM. The violence is not just in Iraq but in many other countries around the world:: Egypt, India, Philippines, Indonesia, Nigeria, Libya, France, Kenya, Central African Republic, Myanmar, Russia, Pakistan, Germany, Israel, Algeria, Bulgaria, Mali, Spain, Mauritania, the Nederlands, Sri Lanka, Lebanon, Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Syria, Sudan, USA, England, Sweden, Yemen, Somalia, etc. etc. etc. The only common factor among ALL these countries terrorist attacks, violence and discrimination is ISLAM.

    January 12, 2014 at 10:29 am | Reply
  20. Mh

    Bushbushbushbushbush. No matter the question he is the answer.

    January 12, 2014 at 10:34 am | Reply
  21. John Curran

    In the cometary on Argentina,Fareed confused Evita Peron with Isabella Peron ..Evita, first wife and Isabella, second

    January 12, 2014 at 10:36 am | Reply
  22. Dave T

    I believe there are three things policy makers could do to secure peace in the Middle East. They are is to change the borders, build a 3-tier wall system along those borders and create shared resources systems.
    1. Currently, the borders of the Middle East place warring sects (Sunnis, Shiites) into the same nation. Whereas, they should place new borders that separate these groups of people that make more sense. They did it in Yugoslavia. They should do this in the Middle East.
    2. Just like all nations, walls with checkpoints would separate these new counties. These walls would help bring new security between warring sects of people. As I read about how in IT they place more than one tier of walls to increase security, they should place 3 tiers of walls with checkpoints instead of one in the Middle East, as well. Each country’s personnel would run those borders touching its nation. The UN personnel would staff the inner-wall. Thus you create more security between these nations even if there were corruption at these borders.
    Historically, there is nothing new in history of the use of walls to bring peace. It was the Ming Dynasty that had a massive walls building project back in the 1400s. They connected all the walls together that now make the Great Wall of China. They included 3 tiers of walls with checkpoints to really enhance security. Thus these walls kept the peace from the invasion of outsiders.
    They could build multiple tiered walls around other places in the Middle East, including around big cities as well. Then you may greatly reduce unwanted people or things from entering as a result. They would build multi tiered walls around embassies, malls, markets, towns, refugee camps and warring groups of people to enhance peace, as well.
    3. The world nations could create a new natural resources revenues program, to where if a nation loses possession of its geographic location of its minerals/oil. The UN would divide that money equally of the nation's mineral rights based on each county's population. This may give the leaders of each country more flexibility to move their borders as a result.
    So to enhance peace please consider, to change the borders, build a 3-tier wall system along those borders and create shared resources systems. It just may work.

    January 12, 2014 at 11:12 am | Reply
    • minnie mouse

      Thank you for your thought-provoking comments.

      January 12, 2014 at 9:04 pm | Reply
  23. RTYWRTYERTY232345





    January 12, 2014 at 11:20 am | Reply
  24. Char

    I'm guessing that Bush had no idea that there was a difference between the Sunni sect and Shia because the Iraqi government was adament that the people do not separate themselves publicly previous to the war. However, I specifically remember when the new government was being assembled saying "Oh. The US is using the old divide and conquer technique." You can't put a secular Muslim in the place of a non secular Muslim government and not expect people to feel left out. Look what happened to the new president of Egypt. He did not let anyone outside of his own beliefs in his own cabinet. Iraq is experiencing these problems because the Sunnis feel left out and because they have never been left out, they feel a loss of rights and say in the building of their new government. Iraq needs to find a representative of the Sunnis and stick him in an important position along with some others to make sure the Sunnis are being heard.

    January 12, 2014 at 11:22 am | Reply
  25. Amazing

    Again with Bush... Zero responsibility or accountability for the current administration. The current president was advised not to remove troops from Iraq by every Commader in Iraq but he did anyway for political gains. No mention of that in this article? I'm sure your next article will be about how Obama ended the war in Iraq and killed OBL.

    January 12, 2014 at 11:25 am | Reply
    • Deuce

      The article is almost spot on. The root cause of all of this is not Bush, per se. Rather, it's the sectarian disputes within Islam itself. Bush's folly of a war simply provided a venue for this animosity to express itself in it's current form. Even more so, no American administration is going to be able to fix this. Democrat or Republican. The solution will have to come from the Sunni and Shia. Period.

      January 12, 2014 at 11:41 am | Reply
      • John Geheran

        Quite right, Deuce. The best solution is to just slit Iraq between the Sunnis and the Shi'a and let each set up their own home state. Keeping Iraq united is just plain dumb!

        January 12, 2014 at 12:20 pm |
    • minnie mouse

      Who did give the go-ahead orders for the bin Laden killing?

      January 12, 2014 at 2:22 pm | Reply
      • Quinton

        Whoever it was minnie, is a war criminal who most definitely needs to be brought to justice. There is no way on earth that a murder like this can be justified. Why didn't these highly trained thugs just slap handcuffs on Ussama bin Laden(if that was the true Ussama bin Laden) and take to Bagram air force base in Afghanistan and hold him for trial instead of just shooting him down like a dog? In either case, he was unarmed!

        January 12, 2014 at 4:05 pm |
      • minnie mouse

        So now you are critical of the Americans for killing Osama bin Laden and refer to THEM as "war criminals and thugs" but bin Laden is just "someone unarmed." So you assume that the 3000 victims in the World Trade Center offices were all armed and therefore deserved to die. I don't know what it is about those Americans. They are just so touchy about bin Laden murdering 3000 people that morning. Go figure.

        January 13, 2014 at 3:32 am |
  26. RTYWRTYERTY232345




    January 12, 2014 at 11:29 am | Reply
  27. Danko

    Fareed loves to sell himself as a truth searching unbiased commentator but the real hard fact is he's a doctrinaire progressive. When I saw candidate Obama carrying one of his books around I picked up a copy and read it myself. It's not a crime Fareed just fess up to your dogmas. You are not a sober commentator without a dog in the fight.

    January 12, 2014 at 11:34 am | Reply
    • Ron Simpson

      If you actually studied Fared, you could not make such a statement.

      January 12, 2014 at 9:37 pm | Reply
  28. Greg

    Where does CNN find these dopes!

    January 12, 2014 at 11:54 am | Reply
    • Greg

      That's quite easily answered. This country is full of ignorant nitwits who support the right-wing thugs in Washington, no matter what! These people are just to feeble minded to think for themselves and the right-wing politicians in Washington love it since this is their bread and butter. People like us who do think know that we never had any right to be in either Iraq or Afghanistan!

      January 12, 2014 at 12:12 pm | Reply
  29. saywhat

    Aiding and abetting them and keeping the military dictatorship propped up in Egypt was wrong on our part. Bad policy lacking foresight.
    It can push Egypt towards radicalism and strife to the extent where AlQaeda which never could find a foothold there, may find an opening. Bad for an already volatile region.

    January 12, 2014 at 12:06 pm | Reply
  30. saywhat

    It was and is up to the people of Egypt to chose who guides their destiny not up to outside powers.

    January 12, 2014 at 12:08 pm | Reply
    • John Geheran

      Well put, saywhat.

      January 12, 2014 at 12:17 pm | Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Leave a Reply to minnie mouse


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.