Matt Yglesias has opened my eyes to the “flypaper theory”, which is one of the newest (to me anyways) justifications for the Iraq war (quotes via Talking Points Memo) :

Being based in Iraq helps us not only because of actual bases; but because the American presence there diverts terrorist attention away from elsewhere. By confronting them directly in Iraq, we get to engage them in a military setting that plays to our strengths rather than to theirs’. Continued conflict in Iraq, in other words, needn’t always be bad news. It may be a sign that we are drawing the terrorists out of the woodwork and tackling them in the open.

“Bring Them On”
Andrew Sullivan
andrewsullivan.com
July 3rd, 2003

Separately, Gen. Ricardo S. Sanchez, commander of coalition ground forces, told CNN that “we still have a long way to go” before eliminating resistance.
Iraq had become “a terrorist magnet,” drawing some anti-American extremists from abroad to “a target of opportunity.”

“But this,” General Sanchez added, “is exactly where we want to fight them.”

“U.S. Must Act on ‘Murky’ Data to Prevent Terror, Wolfowitz Says”
International Herald Tribune
July 27th, 2003

There’s a huge difference between signing up to defend your country and being used as a target. As Matt said, “Now, yes, the fact that our soldiers are volunteers does make some difference here, but still they’re soldiers not human shields. “, but it’s not even that simple. If our soldiers were being used as human shields, wouldn’t they be shielding something? If the “flypaper theory” is true, our soldiers are just being used to attract terrorist attacks. If the proponents of this line of reasoning had any intellectual honesty, they’d cut through the bullshit ephemisms and call this what it is : The Cannon Fodder Theory. I’m not entirely sure this theory is valid, but it would certainly explain Bush’s ambivalence towards the daily deaths of our soldiers.