They Hate our Freedom - also the Occupation

William Arkin, the Washington Post's military-affairs columnist has a good new wonky blog on that topic, which he interprets widely enough to respond at length and with some venom to Bush's "major address" (aren't they all?) from last week. He makes some excellent points about the nature of the terra'ist threat - viz.,

[T]he President also said:
"Some have also argued that extremism has been strengthened by the actions of our coalition in Iraq, claiming that our presence in that country has somehow caused or triggered the rage of radicals. I would remind them that we were not in Iraq on September the 11th, 2001 -- and al Qaeda attacked us anyway. The hatred of the radicals existed before Iraq was an issue, and it will exist after Iraq is no longer an excuse."

This isn't the first time that the President has said that nothing in American policy is at the source of terror. In fact, to credit any "reasoning" behind the 9/11 attacks is so much against the mainstream discourse in Washington, I know to rebut this is to stand at the precipice of a false argument (and a trap) that somehow "blames" America for the attacks of 9/11.

But let's just deal with facts and the way that they are perceived in the against Baghdad. We were bombing Iraq regularly as part of our enforcement of the southern and northern no fly zones, and we were carrying out even larger bombing campaigns to support United Nations inspections or to exact unilateral retribution. We were doggedly maintaining sanctions until Iraq cried uncle. So yes, "the hatred of the radicals" existed before Iraq was an issue, mister President, but Iraq was an issue.