Fighting them where?

Some people still support the war because they say we need to fight them "there" (in Iraq), so we don't have to fight them here. I just saw a Mark Kennedy TV ad pretty much saying the same thing. I don't get it, I really don't.

A poor 20-year old kid with an AK-47 and nothing else attacking soldiers in Iraq was never a threat to the U.S. mainland. He has no support structure. He has little, if any training. The U.S. brought the targets to him, and as a result he is taking advantage of it. If there were no U.S. soldiers in easy reach to attack, he would just sit there fuming, or more likely wouldn't do much at all.

Similarly, people like the 9/11 terrorists with training and money aren't those 20-year old kids. They probably aren't taking potshots at our troops. They may be taking advantage of the Iraq war by using it for training, learning how to use shaped charges and plant IEDs, for example, but for the most part I bet they are not getting heavily involved with the war in Iraq. They are doing the same things they would be doing even if we weren't in Iraq.

There is no fixed pool of terrorists. By going into Iraq, we have created many more fighters were there wouldn't have been before. At the same time, we are in no way helping to fight those sleeper cells that are plotting the next terrorist attack from somewhere other than Iraq.

When Mark Kennedy says that we need to fight them there so we don't fight them here, he is either completely ignorant about the world, or lying. Take your pick.