Would someone please explain the following to me? Bush and his Republican pals tell us that the reason they want to keep American troops in Iraq because they want to “fight the terrorists over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here,” Where, exactly, is the logic in that statement? How does having American troops on the Middle-East prevent a terrorist attack in North America? How does it make U.S. borders more secure or American cities safer? American troops in Baghdad can’t even secure Baghdad, what makes anyone think they are securing New York, Chicago and L.A.?
I just don’t see how keeping American troops in Iraq makes it any less likely that terrorists will attack America. Don’t terrorists have plenty of ways to get into America without going through Iraq first? Indeed, if a terrorist wanted to attack America, how likely do you suppose it is that he would go to Iraq in the first place? Why not just go straight to the U.S.?
Please, the next time Bush or one of the 2008 Republican presidential hopefuls says he wants to keep American troops in Iraq because he wants to “fight them over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here,” ask him to explain how he thinks it will do so.
Print this post [1]
[2]