Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Next Time Iraqis May Actually Be Involved

President Bush listed, among other things, an Iraqi connection to the September 11 terrorist attacks before the invasion in March 2003. While a majority of the "facts" on that list have proven false, including potential WMDs and the "Iraqis will welcome US troops as liberators" arguments, one of the lasting effects of the president's pre-war speeches is the Iraq connection.

In a Newsweek poll conducted this past June, 41 percent of Americans said they still believe that Saddam Hussein was directly involved in the 9/11 attacks, even as several investigations have found no link between Hussein and al Qaeda.

A new intelligence report released this week, however, suggests that al Qaeda is now attempting to include allies in Iraq in planning new terror attacks inside the United States. The following question must then be asked: How has the war in Iraq made our country any safer?

I've never bought the "it's either here or there" argument. It seems obvious to me that a terrorist network based in the Middle East would prefer to attack Americans (in this case, soldiers) stationed and serving in the Middle East instead of trying to smuggle their own forces across our borders. The risks of their plot being disrupted is far too great when one can cross the border into Iraq and plant roadside bombs that murder Americans, creating the same terror stateside.

The number of Americans who have died in Iraq has surpassed the number killed on September 11, 2001. Though terrorists prefer larger targets (3,000 dead on one day as opposed to roughly the same amount over the course of four years is probably considered a greater "success"), the result is still the same.

Americans are dying in a war that has made our nation a more dangerous place to live. We are not safer than we were on September 10, 2001. Nor are we safer than we were the day after the attacks. With the foiled car bombings in London and Scotland and reports such as those stated above, it seems that Americans are finally beginning to comprehend the debacle that is Iraq.

There's no doubt in my mind that another attack on my native land is near, if not imminent. I'm not paranoid, nor an alarmist. In fact, I feel I'm acting quite rationally. Iraq is a broken nation with no signs of stability in sight. Our Congress is struggling to convince the most stubborn president in our nation's history that it's time for change.

And the next time American citizens are murdered at home by terrorists, the Iraq link may indeed be true. But it will only be true because our government made the decision to include them in the War on Terror. Iraq didn't strike first.

We'll have to live, and die, with that fact.

1 comment:

chevallero said...

I can appreciate your comment. What we don't hear is the involvement of Saudis. They are reported to constitute half the entity of bombings - personal and planted. al-Malaki was in exile to Iran and Syria. The U.S.-Iran meeting in Iraq was a farce, merely a vehicle to create more bushism towards attacking. Where was Syria, Turkey, and the Saudi in this? We're being led to a fascist state. Google: PNAC.