I’m curious what stats you’re thinking of when you say “fewer terrorists and terrorist acts”. I certainly believe that, but it’s a stat that begs to be defined.

I didn’t say that. I said there have been more post 9/11. Search the internet. It’s widely known.

And I know that McCain is talking about getting to a similar reality in Iraq, but there are no guarantees of that.

Does that mean it is guaranteed that Iraq will not become a similar situation where all U.S. troops are in a support role and do not perform security operations? Why not take a chance!

First, there are the fiscal costs of maintaining such large troop levels in Iraq.

I would argue that the Middle-east is a strategically important region right now, more so than those other theaters that McCain mentions, like Japan or Germany, not-to-mention the dozens of air-force bases around the world. Perhaps you should downsize those first? Remember, If it wasn’t for the regime change in Iraq, then we would still have the massive Tawfik air base in Saudi Arabia still in operation, where thousands of troops were stationed and daily sorties were flown to enforce the no-fly zone. How do you know that old Saudi base was not as expensive?

Second, there has been no discernible safety gains from our presence in Iraq as the number of terrorists and terrorist acts has actually increased since 9/11.

Really? Even the New York times reports that Al-qaeda is crippled in Iraq and Afghanistan, and that we have shown gains in other regions around the world against Islamic terrorism, such as South Asia. Also, if you count the attacks on Iraqi civilians as part of the Iraq war itself, then terrorism has actually decreased elsewhere throughout the world by 40% since 2001. Blame Bush?

Third, because our resources have been diverted to Iraq, our government has been limited in their capacity to invest in alternative energy sources

Well, come on. The reason why we rely on foreign oil is because congress always blocks access to our own. Besides, its the Saudi air-base, pick-your-poison argument again.

Long story short, the quicker we can get our troops home, the quicker we can start to refocus our efforts on what really matters: American prosperity.

The primary purpose of the government is to protect its citizens from those who would do us harm, so that we can build prosperity on our own. You know how I have always argued that when countries like Iraq use their resources to fight the terrorists in their midst rather than support them or look away, then we are safer in the long run to pursue prosperity unfettered. We don’t have to waste our resources policing the world after terrorist attacks, or sealing off our homeland as the first line of defense, or survelling our citizens as our last line of defense, not to mention avoiding terrorist attacks themselves which are the worst kind of blow to our American way of life, economic or otherwise. It is an investment in security that pays off when we inevitably prosper in the absence of terrorism.