26 X World Champs

I'd like to take the temperature of this Forum by asking people to go on the record answering the following question:

Did Invading Iraq Prevent Attacks in the USA?

Simply put had we not invaded Iraq would there have been another attack on US soil?

mikhail

No a terrorist attack is most likely to come from saudi arabia or a small splinter cell from anywhere.

__________________
The third-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the majority. The second-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking with the minority. The first-rate mind is only happy when it is thinking.

26 X World Champs

Please also vote in the poll. I'm really curious to see how everyone votes.

Adrian

You forgot an option:

"How the f**king hell should I know??

Lachean

Unless our government wants to reveal any real counter terrorism operations, this is something we cannot know, so people will assert whatever they wish.

"No attacks since 9/11! More big brother!"
"Why is 9/11 the start date? Does it not count as an attack under this administration? Why were they not so neo-con hawkish before 9/11?"
"9/11 Changed everything! We must give the government more power to keep us safer!"
"Yeah? I've got a rock that keeps away monsters to sell you."

__________________
"Truth, in the matters of religion, is simply the opinion that has survived." - Oscar Wilde

buttonpsi

Well it is hard to say if it definitely did or didn't, but having so much firepower and so many troops over in the ME right now is not going to help protect us much if something were to happen here.

jfuh

Iraq had absolutely nothing at all to do with 9/11 despite the insistence by apologetics and diehards alike.
Regardless of any policy that we take, terrorist morons will be terrorist morons, indifferent to the Unibomber - it's absolutely stupid to think that governmental policy would be able to counter any form of tactic employed by "enemies" of the state. Hence the rational of how Iraq some how has brought the fight to them is just fracking stupid.
Secondly, what has been the major upset by the middle east world against the west and the US? It has been our dictatorship puppet policies against those nations; for the loud and pathetic minority that has been screaming how we are an imperialist nation this invasion was the silver platter for the delivery of their message and now has provoked further violence and detesting of our country by the people of these countries as the school yard bully.
Hence through increasing the misunderstanding hatred towards US through our policies we've become an even greater target for such jihadists.
Let's not forget just what jihadist means - it's literally a struggle, of course a struggle in the name of god but nevertheless a struggle. These people believe they are struggling against a suppressive force that is telling them how they should be.
Regardless of our best intentions we must recognize that we are a foreign occupator, and I'll be damned if I'm ever to obey the dictations of a foreign power should they invade my country regardless of the terms or if it's "for my benefit" - I did not invite you.

__________________
The facts and science of the theory of anthropogenic Global warming

Cataclysmic 7.9 earthquake in China, how to donate to the relief fund.

26 X World Champs

Exactly! My point was/is that the people who are appeasing Bush and his war mongers do everything they can to refer to 9-11 when talking about Iraq trying to use fear to get the country to do what they say must be done.

Bush even had the balls to try to say that Iraq and Vietnam are tied together and even better, that we left Vietnam too soon (after 14+ years)!

Finally, and importantly it is vital to remember that almost everything that Bush, Cheney and Rice have said about Iraq has turned out to be wrong, very, very wrong.

Billo_Really

As long as our foreign policy keeps enabling this hatred which manifests in these attacks, the answer is "yes".

Attacking Iraq increased our chances.

The incidents of terrorism has been on the rise ever since the invasion in 2003.

__________________

"Political correctness is tyranny with manners"
- Charlton Heston

The Mark

I think I might have chosen the wrong options.
So I will state my opinion here.

There is no way to accurately and correctly answer this question. It is hypothetical. Answering accurately would require that the members and visitors to this site were able to accurately view alternate timelines to positively confirm or disprove their opinions.

My opinion, at the time the decision was made by our government, was that not attacking Iraq would have been worse than attacking it. Now I'm not so sure.

In the period after taking out the Iraqi army, however, I believe things could have been handled better. I don't know how exactly, and perhaps things went as well as humanly possible. But it seems to me that things could have gone better.

But such is in the past.
As this question asks what opinion we have of the past.
There is nothing we can do to change the past, only assign blame so we can feel better, that we have done something.

Individual opinions matter little to our government.

What we really need to worry about is....what our future in Iraq is. Do we "stay the course"? Or do we leave ASAP? Something in between?

__________________
The Mark-----Way off, right on, or somewhere in between, it all depends on your point of view.

Sometimes I think we're alone. Sometimes I think we're not. In either case, the thought is staggering. ~
R. Buckminster Fuller