"Recruits to Muslim terror are made by Muslims who preach evil in God's name and by terrorist victories, not by America fighting back. Just as in the first case, the claim is true, but it undermines the charge. The claim that there are more, indeed many, terrorists in Iraq now is true. But the terrorists are there because they know that if America prevails in establishing a relatively free country where there once stood an America-hating terrorist-supporting Arab regime, they are ultimately doomed. Liberals love to find out the root causes of sociopathological behaviors. Well, one root cause of Islamic terror is the hermetically sealed Arab-Muslim world. Open that up to even some freedom, and the cesspool that produces the terrorist monsters begins to dry up. That is why so many terrorists have moved to Iraq. They agree with President Bush -- the War on Terror is taking place in Iraq." --Dennis Prager

I don't really know if US should or should not have entered Iraq...

It is a very difficult questions to answer, and both sides have some very strong arguments on their respective sides.

When it comes to most terrorist moving to Iraq, I would have to say one thing. If my land was being occupied by another nation (even if that nation claimed they were trying to build me a free society) I would pick up a gun and fight. I am originally from the Ukraine and when the Nazis came they said that they came to free the Ukrainian people from their communist oppressors. This however did not stop my people from having a fierce resistance and fighting the Nazi Occupants every step of the way. Of course I am not here to suggest that the US is in any way like Nazi Germany, but never the less it is a very similar analogy.

While I in no way supported America going into Iraq, the job must be finished now that it was started and evolved into the situation as it stands today. Think of how different this would have been if America had world wide support and assistance. This is the essence of John Kerry's stance on the war in Iraq. Meanwhile, Bin Laden is free to organize and direct from wherever he is. To say he is irrelevant now is naive. America needs help to defeat the terrorists now more than ever, but won't find it with Bush's agenda. As Powell once said, "we're going to cut off it's head." With Saddam now gone, it hasn't stemmed the tide of terrorist activities around the world. Seems the wrong head was cut off. In any case, the world needs to rally to this effort and stop terrorism once and for all.

While I in no way supported America going into Iraq, the job must be finished now that it was started and evolved into the situation as it stands today. Think of how different this would have been if America had world wide support and assistance. This is the essence of John Kerry's stance on the war in Iraq.
------
Oh really? Maybe then you can tell us why Kerry voted against the FIRST Gulf war. I mean we couldn’t have had better support for that one and a UN resolution on top of it to go to war. In fact the coalition for that one was so strong that it made the allies of WW II seem pedestrian. Go ahead and try to explain that one. Explain to us that if Kerry was president back then Saddam right now would have his entire army in tacked and would also be the ruler of Kuwait. Explain what effects his decision would have had in the Gulf oil traffic. Explain what this scumbag many of you are voting for would do to protect us when he didn't even see fit to protect our interests in the most crucial part of the world. And while you at it maybe you can explain the 10 different positions he has taking since the beginning of this race. At least Dean stood against the war and he said so at the very beginning. Right or wrong that was his position. This asshole has change positions so many time even his most avid supporters can’t tell you for sure what he latest is. It will be a sad day in America if this guy becomes president.

Exactly Windsor - that's the drum I've been beating on for a while now. How could he have voted against Gulf War I? It really defies explanation.

Terrorists gathering in Iraq is not altogether a bad thing. We can kill them more easily and efficiently if (1) they congregate in one area, (2) that area is occupied by about 150,000 of the most dangerous, well-armed killers in the history of the world, (3) that area is located on the other side of the planet and (4) that area is so dangerous that not even ACLU lawyers will venture there. Beats the hell out of having to hunt them down in cities across the world (including our own) and then prosecuting them as if they were mere criminals.