The fallacy of "fighting them there"

[markus]

As each pack of lies is exposed, the Bush Administration trots out another pack of reasons for invading Iraq. One of the long-standing favorites (even before it was clear there were no WMD), is the idea that we are "fighting the terrorists there so we don't have to fight them here."

Let us presume that there was actually some sort of fore thought about this in the Bush White House (not likely, but let us be kind). We should then ask, if the entire intention was to create a "honey pot" to attract all of the jihadists in the world, why not Afghanistan?

We had good reason to be in Afghanistan. The attacks of 9/11 were directed and orchestrated there, by UBL, under the protection of the Taliban. This was the war of 9/11, the war all but the most Dovish support if not clamored for.

With so many of the jihadists already there in the Afghanistan/Pakistan area, why not just lie in wait for them there, and engage them on that ground?

There was no significant terrorist presence in Iraq in Iraq. They had to know that the borders of Iraq would be even harder to control than the borders of Afghanistan, given the presence of officially supportive if not friendly regimes on all by the Iranian side of Afghanistan. The very opposite is true of Iraq, with the large borders shared by Iran and Syria.

Simply, there was no reason to "fight the terrorists there". It is another transparent excuse for the war in Iraq.

We may never know Bush's real reasons for the war in Iraq. We only know that every reason he has given us has been proven a knowing, intentional lie.

[Webster Green]

1. So its OK to invade a country in order to attract terrorists to it.....

...so we can fight them there instead of here.

Thats about the most arrogant, chickenshit, illegal & immoral excuse for being a war criminal that I've ever heard.

[LynnTheDem]

2. HEAR! HEAR!

:applause: :thumbsup: :toast:

[markus]

9. Um, well, no, that's not what I said

You are free to oppose the invasion of Afghanistan in response to 9/11. You will not find much company in just about any part of America, in about any random group of people you select.

The point is, if you really wanted to intentionally set a honey pot, there was still no reason to invade Iraq. We were already in Afghanistan in a war that--like it or not--American was legally entitled to enter into.

[AllegroRondo]

3. Never mind the fact that

a vast majority of the current insurgents in Iraq would never have even thought about trying to attack us 'over here' before we invaded.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

4. Didn't Guilliani "invent" that rationale and the WH originally distanced

It was sometime last summer that Rudy first presented that as a rationale and it wasn't immediately embraced by the GOP/WH. But, then, (drum-roll please) they decided it was a new twist since the WMD reports were coming out showing no WMD's. They then embraced it as their own.

Anyone else remember this as the actual chain of events? A non-federal employee presented the reason for our country going to war.

[Hubert Flottz]

5. If were "fighting them there" then why set up a new CIA operation

to spy on people in this country?

Panel may urge a new domestic spy agency
Some members impatient with FBI, CIA

snip>

Revolutionary changes in the nation's counterterrorism efforts -- including creation of a new domestic spy agency -- are among ideas receiving serious consideration from members of the commission investigating the Sept. 11 attacks.

The past two days of commission hearings, which ended Wednesday with withering staff reports on the CIA and FBI performance in combatting al Qaeda, show that panel members aren't satisfied with the current structure of the vast U.S. intelligence community but haven't decided what changes to recommend to Congress and President Bush. Their report is due July 26.

The idea of a domestic intelligence agency modeled after Britain's MI-5 is highly controversial because it raises fears of threats to civil liberties. The idea is opposed by former Attorney General Janet Reno, former FBI Director Louis Freeh, his successor Robert Mueller, who spoke against it again at Wednesday's hearing, and the American Civil Liberties Union, among others. MORE>>>...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/04/15/MNG4R65CR61.DTL

:scared:

[catmandu57]

6. The trouble is see

when we finally tuck our tail between our legs and run for home, as we will eventually, they'll be right on our tails. We may be sick up and fed with fighting and wasting blood and treasure for a sociopathic vision of the world, but, that's not too say people in the ME who have suffered greatly at our hands aren't going to want to get in a few whacks of their own.
By that time, the bull should be weak enough to kill off easily.

[Jeff In Milwaukee]

7. We're fighting them there...

Because the terrorists don't know that they can get direct flights from Europe to American (shhhhhh, not so loud). So for God's sake, don't spill the beans about www.expedia.com -- if they're going to come over and attack us, let's make sure they don't get a deal on the airfare. As long as we're here on the this side of the globe, the terrorists can't find us. Keep it to yourself, OK?

[CatWoman]

8. Markus

visit Dem Bloggers:

International Focus Hurting Homeland Security


By Brian Hopkins
Posted on Wed Jun 29th, 2005 at 09:32:31 AM EST


A new report today shows that Bush's focus on taking the war to the terrorists have hurt us here at home. While budget and spending for the Department of Defense is pushing $500 Billion the Department of Homeland Security is lagging behind, only getting $34 Billion. This shows a clear difference where the President's agenda is at. Reported by Reuters:

http://www.dembloggers.com/story/2005/6/29/93231/1930

[markus]

10. A-F-G-H-A-N-A-S-T-A-N people, Afghanastan

So, can I count everyone who responded as opposed to retaliating against al-Qaeda for 9/11?

That's silly.

Where in my post am I supporting the invasion of Iraq?

The point is to convince the sort of people who think it would be Big Fun to go Fishing with Big Eddy that everything the Bushistas tell them is a pile of hooey.

If we can't seperate the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, then we can never win national elections in this country again. Sorry.