Does anyone think, that if we don't bring the war to them, they will bring the war to us?

Question

I mean, if Bush dosen't keep the troops\pressure on the Fantic Muslim terroristsin Iraq and afganastan,,, don't you think they will build up streangth and try to attack us her in the US?

Answer 1

here is a very simple answer to your question that hopefully will shed some light.
IRAQ HAD NO FRANTIC MUSLIM TERRORIST ON ITS TERRITORY ... UNTIL WE INVADED IT.
So who spreads it really?
Enjoy.

Answer 2

But that's the point -- we're not taking the war to them.

We're not putting pressure on the terrorists in Afghanistan. Or Pakistan. Or Syria, Libya, Iran, Palestine, Saudi Arabia or any other country.

We're spending so much of our resources playing police and nation building in Iraq that we are unable to deal with the problems anywhere else in the world.

Al Qaeda didn't even exist in Iraq until 2004 -- two years after we went in (according to US intelligence reports). And our continued occupation (and preoccupation) with Iraq has only allowed Al Qaeda to grow and recruit more (again, according to US military and intelligence reports).

The reason we haven't had a terrorist attack on US soil has nothing to do with our being in Iraq. Look at the history -- the US is hit by a major foreign terrorist attack every 7~9 years, since the 1960s. 2001, 1983, 1975 and going back. So, Bush doesn't get any credit for not having one sooner than the average.

Answer 3

We are there to keep them from organizing. They will be here no matter what we do. They are already here, don't kid yourself. Say 4 or 5 hundred here in the US each pick a local school, and a common day to meet Allah. Wiping out 4-5 thousand of our children. Would that upset us? Would it upset us enough to retaliate here at home? Burn a few local Mosques. Then they tell the world that we are just committing hate crimes. The left in our country jump once again on their propaganda train and blame the right for being war mongers.
It is a vicious cycle that has already started. When the left is already spewing the same words as our enemies how can you say I'm wrong?

Answer 4

Terrorists already have. Say what you want about Bush, the Iraq War, and the justifications for going into Iraq, but terrorists do go where the fight is. They know no nationalities or borders, at least not in the same way that we do, and they respond to a higher calling than nationality, race or even language. So, Iraq is the flame and the terrorists are the moths.

Answer 5

They have already "brought it" to us. Remember our history, folks.

We have had attacks on embassies and assets of ours for years. Then there's the homeland stuff. Aside from plots we discovered and halted, there is the World Trade Center in 1993 AND 1999.

If we leave will it stop? Why should we even expect it to?

For all the negative spin on Iraq, there is one thing that even the Democrats can't dispute - We are fighting them there so that we won't have to fight them here. In all probability, "fight", is actually a strong word, as we'll likely just be attacked and not be able to defend - terrorism,after all, is an effective method of warfare.

The Democrats will pin the arrival of Al Qaida in Iraq on their favorite target - Bush. It may be true that he's to blame. One thing certain, though... they can't say that Al Qaida isn't there any longer. It is. And it hasn't forgot about our Homeland, either.

Answer 6

The more you stick around Iraq I virtually guarantee you something will happen on the American mainland. It is a "no-brainer" as the Americans like to say I think. The Iraqi war alone is making you more unpopular than Vietnam and Hurricane Katrina (the lack of help) put together.

Answer 7

The argument that there haven't been any terrorist attacks since 9/11, because our troops are fighting them in Iraq is a complete fallacy.

The reason there haven't been any terrorist attacks since 9/11, is more counter-terrorist units, airline marshals, that republicans didn't think we needed before September 11th, and more is being done to thwart terrorist attacks.
Terrorist plots are still occuring, they are jsut capturing far more of them before they are more than just plots.

Answer 8

Yes I do believe that. Clinton decided not to act after the first WTC, he decided not to fight back after the two embessy bombings, and the Cole. That said while I agree we need to fight them I disagree with Iraq. If it were up to me I would not decide this fight on one front (IE Iraq) Instead I would use or spy satellites to find there camps and launch missiles at them. If there were key leaders in the camp I would use SF personal to kidnap them. I would also place more units abroad to hunt them down. Terrorists lurk in places where there is not that strong of governments that is where after the state Department makes new allies the US brings in the greatest war machine in existance wipes out the muslim extremists and there allies and move on. This will not give them time to build their IEDS as we will be on a 24/7 365 days a year hit and run offensive. We will wipe them out 1 by one. Basically no matter where they go in the world I would hunt them down like dogs, A sheik preaches death to America in a Mosque the CIA makes sure that Sheik gets their throat slashed in alley. Of course thats just my two cents..

Answer 9

Terrorists dont have a specific country, we are bringing war to Iraq and terrosists are attacking Europe. In other words terrorists are going to bring the war to us regardless and we are doing nothing more than providing motivation for them to do so.

Answer 10

Yes

Answer 11

Yes I actually do beleive that but unless a terrorist uses some Bio or Nuke weapon any attacks really won' t be all that costly