Bush wants 245 Billion more of our dollars

[H]

Show me there isn't.

 

Well, it's impossible to prove a negative. However, it simply isn't plausible that the Bush administration would keep a foiled U.S. terrorism plot in Iraq under wraps because it would bolster the President's dubious claim that the invasion was a legitimate action in the "war on terror". If we had busted up a planned terrorist attack against the U.S. that was being planned in Iraq, Dick Cheney would be yelling it from the rooftops. The administration has made a lot of patently false claims about Iraq ("we'll be greeted like liberators", "insurgency is in its last throes", "we're winning in Iraq"), but even these guys haven't had the audacity to claim they've broken up bona fide terrorism plots against the U.S. as a result of starting this war. Try again.

 

 

The fact remains that we are into our 6th year without another attack here. That is not a coincidence.

 

You're making the mistake here of confusing correlation with causality. Just because the rooster crows at sunrise doesn't mean that the rooster caused the sun to come up. And just because we haven't been attacked here at home doesn't mean the Iraq war has successfully prevented a terrorist attack.

[ladiesbballcoach]

Well, it's impossible to prove a negative. However, it simply isn't plausible that the Bush administration would keep a foiled U.S. terrorism plot in Iraq under wraps because it would bolster the President's dubious claim that the invasion was a legitimate action in the "war on terror". If we had busted up a planned terrorist attack against the U.S. that was being planned in Iraq, Dick Cheney would be yelling it from the rooftops. The administration has made a lot of patently false claims about Iraq ("we'll be greeted like liberators", "insurgency is in its last throes", "we're winning in Iraq"), but even these guys haven't had the audacity to claim they've broken up bona fide terrorism plots against the U.S. as a result of starting this war. Try again.

 

 

 

 

You're making the mistake here of confusing correlation with causality. Just because the rooster crows at sunrise doesn't mean that the rooster caused the sun to come up. And just because we haven't been attacked here at home doesn't mean the Iraq war has successfully prevented a terrorist attack.

As a Bush supporter cannot prove what you state here, neither can you prove that it has not. Simply both sides makes the claim because it is what they want to believe. You want to believe that it has not. 75center wants to believe it has. I tend to think that 75center is more correct. But I cannot prove that.

 

As far as your claim of breaking up a terrorist plan through Iraq and Bush not claiming it, if it is still a bonafide source of information and release of that information would put that source in jeopardy, I could see them not doing it.

[H]

No more than H asked of me, or did you miss that? If we're bottling them up and killing them before an attack can take place there obviously is no evidence; at least not that would be released to the public at this time.

 

Oh come now. How on earth could we be "bottling them up" so we can kill them before they attack us? We can't even secure the borders to prevent weapons and support from coming in from Iran and Syria. We can't tell who the bad guys are because the dress like civilians and melt into the population (like all insurgents do). They can come and go from Iraq as they choose because we can't recognize who they are (just like we couldn't in Vietnam). If there were bad guys in Iraq with the capability to launch attacks on U.S. soil, why would they hang around Baghdad looking for fights with vastly superior U.S. firepower?

 

Sorry, but that argument doesn't hold water.

[ladiesbballcoach]

They are so focused on making sure of our defeat in Iraq that their focus is off attacking us once again here on our soil. THat is the view I have heard in regards to no terrorist attacks tied to Iraq.

 

ANd it holds a logic to it. The terrorists would feel that the defeat of the American presence in the Middle East is more important than an attack on American soil, once again.