Follow us home if we leave? I dunno....that sounds a bit off the wall.?

Question

One of the posts I've read here stated that if we leave Iraq there will be a radical 'government' established in that country that will train, equip and dispatch commandos to the US and begin a campaign of terror here. I suppose that's a fear, but 'terror' cuts both ways. Any attack or planned attack on the US mainland would result in massive retaliation against all above ground infastructure in Iraq, the killing or capture of what ever 'warlord' decided that he could get away with pulling Uncle Sam's beard. No future administration would be able to 'do nothing' as some of these 'right wingers' suggest would happen. While we could never be 100% 'safe' after a withdrawal, we're not 100% 'safe' now. This needs some real discussion. Best case...worst cast...most likely...least likely. Wadda' 'ya think?

Answer 1

"Follow us home" is a bumper sticker sound bite designed to put and keep fear in the hearts of Americans. Oddly enough, it is our very own President that enjoys instilling fear in us. Unlike previous leaders that told us that the only thing we have to fear is fear itself. Bush wants us to live in fear so that he can keep this war going and any war of his choice going.

Answer 2

I don't know if you are oversimplifying on purpose or not but here is the reality of the situation.

First: If we withdraw too early and allow the fledgling democratic government to topple, it will most certainly be replaced by a Radical Muslim dictatorship. This will be a safe haven for terrorists and the oil will bring them the wealth they need to fund serious attacks throughout the western world.

Second: The terrorist cells already in place will once again begin receiving the funding and smuggled equipment they need to commence operations while remaining under the radar. Many more moderate Muslims who are on the fence will be swayed to support the radicals since they will have been perceived to have defeated our military.

Your point that an attack here would result in "Massive retaliation against all above ground infastructure in Iraq" is not true at all. Do you think we would be willing to bomb women and children any more then then we are now? You cannot imagine throngs of anit-war protesters marching on Washington? Do you think people will have the stomach for another Iraq war? Good luck trying to get congress to vote for that again.

The democrats are already on the record as believing that using the military is exactly the wrong thing to do. They all see terrorism as a law enforcement problem (With the possible exception of Bill Richardson). They want to take funding away from the military and give it to first responders. This approach by all practical purposes, assumes we are willing to accept attacks and will respond with arrests and trials after the fact.

I am sorry I just don't see any military attack on anything if the democrats control congress and the White House.

.

.

Answer 3

Completely, totally, 100% right! That is exactly why it was clear, ON 9/11, that Iraq or any state had nothing to do with what happened that day. Talk about "bang for the buck" - what political state in its right mind would risk the wrath of the US raining down upon it just for the sake of taking 3000 US lives and felling a high-profile piece of real estate? (Hussein may have been amoral, but he was *not* irrational - he was studiously calculating even while miscalculating in 1990 and 91.)

Further, it is ludicrous to envision terrorists kicking their boot toes into the ground in Iraq out of abject frustration that, dammit, these Americans in Baghdad are preventing them from leaving the country, getting on a plane somewhere else, and flying to the U.S. to commit their atrocities. If, indeed, terrorist entry into the US has been foiled, it's been because of stepped-up security efforts HERE (legal or otherwise) and NOT because we have troops in Iraq.

If having troops in Iraq is what's keeps terrorists from striking, then how did Madrid's trains and London's subways get bombed while Spanish and British troops were getting the bad guys in Iraq?

Answer 4

Why would the terrorists have to wait until the troops are out? If the troops are here, they can defend the country. If the troops are over there, they can't.

Practically speaking, how would they come into US? Take a flight directly into the US? Would they get Visas? They'll have to deal with Homeland Security here. The only way they can come into US is indirectly - through our very open borders, from Canada and Mexico. Or by sea. Hopefully, there are enough national guards to keep them out.

Answer 5

Good Points.

But it also makes some sense that while Islamic radicals are volunteering to fight in Iraq, they can't come here at the same time.

Getting Sunnis in Iraq to fight them is a tactic that might thin their numbers before they can come here, but it might also give the survivors combat experience to use against us.

You are correct that there is no way we can be sure of our security. We can only hope we keep catching them before they act as we did recently at JFK Airport and Fort Dix, NJ.

Sooner or later they will strike again. Those who have a theory on the issue can argue all they want over weather The Iraq War has made us safer or more threatened. I wish we could develop nonlethal weapons so we can capture any enemy rather than kill enemies and innocent people who happen to be near them. That would, I hope, reduce the number of people who want to kill us out of revenge for one of their loved ones being killed by us.

http://www.yaktivist.com
Polite Discussion, Respectful Disagreements regarding nonlethal alternatives to Abortion, Death Penalty, Lethal Weapons.

Answer 6

You've seen that bogus claim only once on here?

Wow, you must be new, as I've seen it possibly thousands of times.

It's what the Bushies have been saying for years, and it gets repeated through all their propaganda outlets over and over and over.

It's exactly what the Nazi's talked about: the Big Lie. If the lie is really a whopper, just keep saying it over and over and over and over and over and over and over and a lot of morons will believe it, just because they keep hearing it spoken of as truth.

Yes, it's absurd to think that any weak country is going to invade us -- or that any single country would invade us.

Our illegal and immoral war on Iraq has, in fact, made more terrorists -- terrorism has been up, and the perpetrators (London bombing, for example) have said it's in retaliation for Iraq.

To me, I find the idea of murdering people elsewhere, and encouraging terror elsewhere, as a way of not having it over here morally repugnant, as well as irrational.

I would imagine that those who lost loved ones in the terrorist attacks we've inspired are less than thrilled to hear us keep saying it, too.

Besides the "fight 'em there so they don't invade, take over, and make us all wear burkas" (yes, I've seen these things said many, many times, seriously), there's the Big Lie that liberals WANT that to happen.

You know, everyone who disagrees with Bush (the vast majority of Americans, BTW) are terrorists who hate America.

All liberals want their own country destroyed.

If a liberal is in charge, and we're invaded, they will not fight it, but will simply give the country over to our enemies.

(I've seen it stated here, more times that I can count, that if a Democrat is elected president, we'll all be wearing burkas in few months.)

The fact that these claims are completely absurd is irrelevant to the wing-nuts.

When do they care about reasonableness, truth, fact, or reality?

There have been few attacks "over here" -- but to many, the fact that we haven't been attacked again here means that what Bush has been doing has "worked."

As though we were experiencing terrorist attacks on our soil at least once a week before we invaded Iraq.

Answer 7

The first 3 answers are from idiot who have not read what these "freedom fighters" have openly said many times over. They will establish a training ground in Iraq to launch terrorist attacks at Isreal and the US. In fact if the 3 previous idiots had paid attention, they would have realized that history already indicates they have done so in the past. The 9-11 attacks were planned and training was carried out in Afghanistan under the Taliban regiem.

You liberals better wake up and read the real history of the past 20 years and you will no longer make stupid statements like the 3 responders did here.

As for the asker, good question, but please look at real, non-revisionist history for the facts. You will find that we are better off right now than we would be if we pulled out.

Answer 8

Well, George wants to bring some of them back already! I say let them fight their own civil war and if they mess with us again, no more Mr. Nice Guy crap. Level the idiots who dare to kill our people on our own soil. The terrorists will never stop until their own countries say no more and line them up for a firing squad. If they won't do it there, we will do it here if they persist. America is sick and tired of all the PC crap we're supposed to be swallowing. No religion should ask that they murder everyone who is not Muslim, I realize that these are the radicals but if you were Muslim, would you help these people denigrade you? Time for action. Safety and security are only an illusion as we've been shown time and again. I'd feel better doing something than nothing.

Answer 9

Your right and I agree with Truth Seeker. It is used to instill fear. The natzis repeated phrases over and over again in their propaganda and it seems the words "Terrorism, terrorist regimes, nuclear threat" are all the anyone ever talks about anymore so we are brainwashed into thinking these third world countries are huge threats to us, and vote for Rudy McRomney!

Answer 10

I think most of the people who support this war fail to realize what it would be like to have an occupying force in our own country. Imagine if Iran decided that Bush was an evil dictator, and they needed to free the American people. Sure, most people would love to see George go, but an Iranean army bombing the hell out of our country and patrolling our streets? Do you think Americans would just sit back and take it? Staying in Iraq is only making things worse, they don't want us there any more. We can't prevent random bombings from happening by patrolling their streets. If they think they need a civil war to settle things, let them fight amongsts themselves, why do we need to sit in the middle of it. This whole "They're going to follow us home" crap is just a scare tactic to keep us there, so Bush and his cronies can keep profiting off this war.

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article3995.htm

Answer 11

<- Republican

Yeah, I agree, that it is entirely off the wall. Sounds like a fear mongering tactic. I wish that talking point would just die, it doesn't look good for us.

Radical government being established if we leave IS a strong possibility. I don't think they would seek to come here, but they probably would try to do something against us somehow, somewhere.