The British considered the U.S. to be terrorists in 1776, but then too, they had the same attitude about Ghandi, the Israelis, etc. In the case of France under German rule, it was the local people, with the support of a government in exile that was trying to take back their country from a foreign totalitarian rule.

In Iraq, it is a situation where foreigners are killing innocent civilians to establish a totalitarian rule. While the U.S. involvement may have been misguided, I doubt that anyone in their right mind would doubt that if there was a stable government in place, that the U.S. would pull out of Iraq. The odds are that there are more Saudis, Iranians, and other muslim terrorists in Iraq than home grown terrorists. The problem is, once America removed a stable government, no matter how cruel and tyrannical it was, they had a responsibility to not leave until they had established a new stable government. The religeous radicals have no need to be concerned with civilians or future needs. Their terrorism is based on the concept that if they keep killing people, it will force out any stable rule and make it impossible for outside nations to control the chaos. Once the nations that are dedicated to establishing a government have been run off, they can create a civil war that will kill anyone that does not accept their rule. The problem is that the balance of power between the Shiites and Sunnis is of such a nature that no Middle East country can afford to allow it to continue, but they also know that if they get officialy involved, they will have to deal with an out and out battle on their soil.

__________________
Lord, let me be the person my dog thinks I am.