Great logic there - Bush hands Bin Laden the best present he could wish for - Yay! lets re-elect him - he must know the best way to fight terrorism, because, er, he’s shown he knows how to encourage it, or something?
Remember that several of the architects of the invasion have haunted the halls of power for decades. Bush losing will not keep some of these folk from having further deleterious influence over the forutnes of the US.
Imagine if you will, Kerry wins and the rash of attacks occurs. How will the architects of the invasion be seen then?
Consider then the same scenario with Mr. Bush still at the helm.
Which do you think’d be better for the US as a whole in the long term? I think if the pigeon’s came home on Mr. Bush’s watch it’d be more fitting. It’d serve to further discredit the movement and would better innoculate America against similarly misguided military foreign policy ventures.
The big difference is that:
in Nam, the Vietcong received massive supplies and logistics from USSR and China. The US at least knew the enemy is communism amd communistic forces.
in Iraq, the insurgents may have joined forces recruited members of a group that already have fought and defeated the USSR.