[TomB]

Now that's a naive outlook if I ever heard one. Some guy who might have considered flying a 737 into a building in New York City next year has decided instead to pack his bags and fight a holy war against U.S. troops in Iraq.

See post 35. The "killing them" was meant as a flippant comment, however the overall point stands. If they are spending their time and resources in a hopeless fight in Iraq, they are less likely to hit us.

And you, also, conveniently ignored the second part of my post, your solution.

[Alberta's Child]

And you, also, conveniently ignored the second part of my post, your solution.

The Solution (Assuming the War on Terror is Truly a War Against Islamic Fundamentalism)

Part 1: Immediate interment and deportation of all U.S. non-citizen residents from Islamic countries. Mandatory registration, fingerprinting, and identification of all non-citizens from other countries.

Part 2: The immediate sacking of all FBI, INS, and CIA officials in the U.S. government whose negligence and/or incompetence resulted in the 9/11 attacks, followed by criminal prosecutions for criminally negligent homicide and dereliction of duty.

Fighting a "war on terror" in Iraq without taking these steps at home is a monumental waste of time. Which leads me to speculate that the war in Iraq has absolutely nothing to do with fighting terrorism.

[streetpreacher]

If they are spending their time and resources in a hopeless fight in Iraq, they are less likely to hit us.

American soldiers are US. You're turning the old conservative adage that armies "kill people and break things" on its' head. In your view, american soldiers are human shields that, because of stupid forein policy and interventionism, take bullets meant for you. Must be nice living the sheltered life.

Would someone please bring back the draft, so those who express the sentiments given above could start earning their keep in our effort to "make the world safe for democracy" and draw terrorists away from the mainland? LOL