Better to fight them THERE than HERE?

There is only one course of action against them: to defeat them abroad before they attack us at home. The commander in charge of coalition operations in Iraq -- who is also senior commander at this base -- General John Vines, put it well the other day. He said: "We either deal with terrorism and this extremism abroad, or we deal with it when it comes to us."GWB, 6/28/5

We have heard this Bush favourite for months now--it was a staple in his 2004 campaign. But, why has no one analysed this bizarre claim?

I think the it's better to fight them there than here argument is probably the most cynical, disgusting and disturbing reason for fighting in Iraq that I could imagine. First of all, we had a 'there' prior to invading Iraq. It was called Afghanistan. We were in that country legitimately--they harboured and protected the planners of 9/11. And, Afghanistan was crawling with al Qaeda [curiously, 4 years later, it still is]. So, before you go defending the Iraq strategy Bush outlined, perhaps someone can explain why we needed another 'there' there.

Second, there is no justification in American or international law for making another country your personal battleground. None.

Third, those people we were 'liberating' a few years ago now find that they are the bait in our mousetrap. How do Iraqis feel about Bush turning their nation from probably the only nation in the ME without an al Qaeda presence in March 2003 into the 'central front on the war against terrorists?'

"Why are the Americans drawing terrorism into Iraq?" asked Abdul Ridha al-Hafadhi, 58, head of a humanitarian aid group. "Why don't they find another place to fight terrorism?" he asked.

Yea, I kinda thought that is how they would feel about it. Kinda hard to blame them, isn't it? But, we have failed to seal the borders, and allowed....well, I'll let W explain it:

Our military reports that we have killed or captured hundreds of foreign fighters in Iraq who have come from Saudi Arabia and Syria, Iran, Egypt, Sudan, Yemen, Libya and others.

Fourth, what makes anyone think that the terrorists can't send teams to America if we are fighting them elsewhere? That question has always haunted me, too, and I have never heard any reason by Bush or his minions as to why fighting in Iraq would preclude fighting in the US. After all, Bush also said this Tuesday night:

To achieve these aims, they have continued to kill -- in Madrid, Istanbul, Jakarta, Casablanca, Riyadh, Bali, and elsewhere.

Kinda makes a mockery of his illogical claim that they can only fight in Iraq, now, doesn't it? So, we pick a nation to host our battle with others, without them putting in a bid to host the WOT Olympics, bring in all kinds of foreign terrorists, and that is a good thing?