Is the president still running the line that the 'War on Terror' and/or the invasion of Iraq made the world or America safer from terrorism? If so,aren't there some statistics which suggest that this claim may not be 100% correct?

How does he explain the London tube and bus bombings of 7/7/2005 which killed 52 commuters plus the four suicide bombers? And the London plot of two weeks later which failed only because the bombs failed to detonate fully on the trains ? Perhaps he likes what lawyers call 'special pleading', giving a statement which is literally true but which is not a valid answer e.g saying 'I do not owe £100' when the truth is 'I do not owe £100(but I owe £101)' or 'I do not owe £100 (but I owe £99)'. No terrorists have succeeded in the US since 9/11 or the invasion but, logically, Britain being present in Iraq and America's main (only) ally and being part of this so-called War on Terror, Britain too should be safer. As it is, our intelligence and police chiefs say that there are hundreds of jihadists here in Britain and many plots. The bombings and the plots are all post 9/11, all post Iraq and all post- the WOT starting.Indeed, the 7/7 attack was the first and only successful muslim extremist attack originating and carried out in Britain. The Pan Am bomb over Lockerbie was not so.

The Iraq Effect

Of course, it's such an ill-defined topic, which is difficult to measure and involves so many variable causes. Bush could always say that, yes, terrorism has increased, but imagine how much more it would have increased if he hadn't created the chaotic and bloody failed state in Iraq. It wouldn't be very convincing, but he could say it.

Actually, rather than claiming to have won the GWOT, Bush seems to be trying to spin the freedom thing into his big achievement in office - He Came, He Saw, He Humbled, Bush’s Lectures on Democracy Fall on Deaf Ears. "Freedom and democracy" seem to be defined as voting in a government that Bush approves of; otherwise, it's merely "shallow populism" or some such.

'What does your Dad do?'

'He keeps the zebras out of Trafalgar Square'

'But there are no zebras in Trafalgar Square !'

'See? That proves his policy and practice are working. Imagine what might happen if he wasn't there!'

Safer?? well I think since 9/11 America isn't safer but more paranoid than ever.I still even hear that false story once in a while that the Terrorists flew or drove across into the U.S. from Canada when actually they flew into America from somewhere else(faulty info like the W.M.D's)..anyway I am rambling here but I think the question to ask is...If there is another war after America leaves Iraq, will America say go and fight for Israel against any Arab nations that come against it? I think the answer is obvious-NO!

So safer?/ perhaps as long as after Iraq they stay out of future wars as I don't believe America wants to fight with anybody anymore but the continued search and capture of any terrorists on their list, that war will continue-yes

I do know that I have not directly suffered a terrorist attack since 9-11, since the war on Saddam, er, I mean Iraq... so obviously whatever bush is doing is working.

Of course this is to not say that prior to bush and these things that I was attacked by terrorists.......