Is there any truth to 'the enemy would follow us here?'

[babylonsister]

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/17038910.htm

Is there any truth to 'the enemy would follow us here?'
By William Douglas
McClatchy Newspapers

WASHINGTON - It’s become President Bush’s mantra, his main explanation for why he won’t withdraw U.S. forces from Iraq anytime soon.

In speech after speech, in statement after statement, Bush insists that “this is a war in which, if we were to leave before the job is done, the enemy would follow us here.”

The line, which Bush repeated Wednesday in a speech to troops at California's Fort Irwin, suggests a chilling picture of warfare on American streets.

But is it true?

Military and diplomatic analysts say it isn't. They accuse Bush of exaggerating the threat that enemy forces in Iraq pose to the U.S. mainland.

“The president is using a primitive, inarticulate argument that leaves him open to criticism and caricature,” said James Jay Carafano, a homeland security and counterterrorism expert for the Heritage Foundation, a conservative policy organization. “It’s a poor choice of words that doesn’t convey the essence of the problem - that walking away from a problem doesn’t solve anything.”

U.S. military, intelligence and diplomatic experts in Bush's own government say the violence in Iraq is primarily a struggle for power between Shiite and Sunni Muslim Iraqis seeking to dominate their society, not a crusade by radical Sunni jihadists bent on carrying the battle to the United States.

more...

[Warpy]

1. Stupid's war has made that inevitable, and we all know it.

However, it won't be as an army, not unless he starts to attack more countries and the world gets alarmed enough to unite against us in the next world war, a distinct and very frightening possibility.

[monktonman]

2. Dumb-ass

He might as well just admit
that he's done absolutely nothing to protect America after 911
Otherwise why be so freaked out about it??

[no_hypocrisy]

3. It's a(nother) delusional fallacy.

Like saying that snapping your fingers keeps away the tigers, there are no tigers for miles of Omaha, and then claiming, "See? It works!"

Fighting "them" "over there" is not going to stop a homestyle attack by either residents of or visitors to the U.S.

[izzie]

7. You never can tell after all all the other second rate people are now

in DC working for Bush. It may work that way with every thing. They must have followed him up to DC. We had a few terrorist here so it means that they will all come here. What they are doing with this stop off in Iraq is hard to understand. I never got the logic Bush put our but who knows.

[HereSince1628]

4. Almost right..."the P is ...a primitive inarticulate... open to criticism"

:rofl:

Suppose he is dirty or clean?????????????????

:rofl: rofl:

[Whoa_Nelly]

5. "They" won't be coming for "us", per say

But, there may be some people who just might come after these guys.





"They will follow us here." = "They will come after my sorry ass."

[AndyA]

6. Of course, the really obvious seems to escape them.

Why don't we spend the money here to protect ourselves?


We could check incoming shipments at our ports. Put more Police on the streets. Upgrade and repair our critical power and communications infrastructures. Beef up bridges, subways, train rails, etc.

We could put our troops to work over here protecting us instead of risking their lives in another country.

But we've done none of that.

Makes you wonder how much of a threat there really is. :eyes:

9/11 probably wouldn't have happened if we'd had a RESPONSIBLE Administration in office at the time.

[Demobrat]

8. What I want to know is ...

how are they going to get here? Osama's private jet? Most of the "insurgents" are poor Iraquis pissed about the occupation. They barely have the resources to survive in their own country, much less make their way over here, feed and house themselves and plan and stage terrorist attacks.

[durtee librul]

17. Halliburton gave them all water wings and they

are currently swimming here. However, once here, the one dry foot rule will apply and they will be citizens.

[CJCRANE]

9. It's bullshit.

It makes no difference. If someone wants to attack on American soil they will regardless of where the troops are.

[The Magistrate]

10. It Would Depend, Ma'am

On how badly the diversion of Iraq has damaged U.S. capability against al Queda and the jihadist underground generally outside Iraq.

The main contending parties in Iraq have no particular interest in the U.S. besides its departure from their country. On our departure they would all have their hands full battling local enemies. One element that would be quickly exterminated, as it is regarded with hostility by all native factions, are the foreign fighters of 'al Queda in Iraq'. The idea that Iraq, absent the U.S., would become a hot-bed of al Queda, or under al Queda control, is more than usually laughable.

However, the basic strategy of al Queda is to draw the United States into major military actions in the Islamic world, and so replicate what it feels to be its success in toppling the Soviet Union. The entry of the Soviets into Afghanistan, their defeat there, and the political difficulties the Soviet government faced in consequence, provide al Queda its template for fighting the United States. The purpose of the September attacks was to produce such a reaction in the United States, and while the U.S. engagement in Afghanistan was something of a disappointment, from their view and to their hopes, the foolishness of the administration in pressing on into Iraq gave them everything they had hoped for. Accordingly, it is quite likely that a withdrawl of U.S. forces from Iraq will be followed by a renewed attempt on the part of al Queda to strike in the continental United States in some spectacular manner, in the hope of provoking some response akin to the invasion of Iraq.

Thus, the thing will depend on how good our guard is against the actual enemy, who we seem to have largely disengaged from over the last several years in favor of piling resources into fighting in Iraq.

[louis-t]

12. It seems to me that there are not enough troops in our country to

adequately protect our borders, our cities, our ports. What better time for a spectacular attack? 12,000 more National Guard will be leaving soon. We are wide open to attack. I do not believe radical Muslims will "follow us here". I think we are more vulnerable now than we will be when our troops come home.

[The Magistrate]

15. But We Are Already Doing What They Want, Sir

So right now there is no point to expending the resources to carry out an attack. Things like that are done to a purpose, not merely for show or enjoyment of slaughter. Human resources apt to such an attack are not common, and not to be wasted.

[Rageneau]

11. Remember when North Vietnam invaded San Francisco?

When North Vietnam attacked our West Coast, it proved that conservatives were right all along -- that if we pulled out of VN, the commies would follow us home to America and rape our children and confiscate our guns. (Or was it the other way around?)

Anyway, here we have history repeating itself.

But do those wimpy, anti-war liberals ever learn?

[FiveGoodMen]

19. !

:applause:

[Demobrat]

20. So THAT'S why

we have so many good Vietnamese restaurants!

[sinkingfeeling]

13. Best quote of the day: "The president is using a primitive, inarticulate argument .."

When the president is primitive and inarticulate, what other type of argument could we expect?

[Marrak]

14. Remember Iran-Contra?

with Nicaragua so close, Rey-gun, Eliot Abrams et. al used the evil red-tide imagery lapping up onto Texas shores!

[thecrow]

16. I think they could find the way by themselves

they don't need to follow anyone....

It's just that Smirky can't stand the thought of anyone doing anything unless they are following him.... kinda like the 30% Murkin Sheeple.
He's a narcissistic SOB.

[FiveGoodMen]

18. The enemy can read a map. They don't need to follow us.

Seriously, does anyone -- anyone, anywhere -- REALLY think that every potential terrorist is somehow tied down by the fighting in Iraq and unable -- because of that -- to get to the US for some mischief?

ANYONE???