Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
Thanks for clarifying your point. As far as I know the terrorists who bombed the train Madrid were not trained in Iraq. But who knows? I doubt that they were coordinated from Iraq -- I think they were coordinated from whereever many of the attacks in Iraq are coordinated from. Like a cave in Pakistan.
But really -- suggesting that this makes the "breeding ground" claim hollow? It took quite a few years before people trained in Afghanistan began attacking the US or Russia elsewhere.
And it's not like they don't have an abundance of American targets in Iraq. I don't understand why supporters of the war think American deaths don't "count" if they aren't being killed on US soil. When we invaded Iraq, did anyone anticipate 1500 American soldiers being killed by terrorists?
|
The argument has been that the war in Iraq was going to lead to more terrorist attacks against American citizens around the world. This has not happened. As far American deaths in Iraq, the prediction was the original invasion was going to cost thousands of deaths. The original invasion went much better than anticipated and the occupation has been more difficult than anticipated. But for being in a war for over two years, the casuality count is very low.
