xfreeper wrote above:
[[ We could cease any and all involvement around the world and the attacks would continue until the US accepts Sharia law for all it's citizens ]]
You have it right, sir.
Both G.W. Bush -and- Rand Paul are wrong.
Bush was wrong because he (and his advisors, and most Republicans) believed that we could go into Iraq, topple Saddam, hold a "free" election, "rebuild" the nation into a "democracy", and then we would be "safe".
Rand Paul is wrong because he believes that if we just withdrew from the Middle East and left them alone, they would stop hating us, and the terrorists would stop their jihad.
BOTH of the above approaches are ridiculous and ignore the reality of islam.
The jihadis don't care who is in charge of the "nations" of the Mideast. They are ALWAYS going to hate us, because we are who we are. "Who we are," are the infidels, living in dar al-harb. And the entire purpose of islam is to overcome dar al-harb and transform it into dar al-islam. (Aside: for all you folks reading this, if those two terms confuse you, you'd better look them up.)
dar al-islam is in a fight to the finish with dar al-harb. The only problem here (for us, that is) is that dar al-harb doesn't even seem to understand or grasp the nature, the existentiality, of this struggle.
Someday, perhaps when the jihadis finally get their hands on a nuclear device or two, The West may wake up. But by then, it may be too late.
Could this struggle be ended? Yes, I believe -- with two weapons, one each deployed against two cities. I sense that the time may come when they will have to be used. It may be The West's last chance....