Take another look at those statistics, and then rethink what you assert.
Either what I assert: that there is no reason to assume that we would get a many hundred percent increase in terrorism that would begin close to the date we invaded Iraq, if we hadn't invaded Iraq...
Or what you avoid asserting but must be true to make your statement true: that there was a scheduled mega-increase in terrorism that would have occurred worldwide, that would have begun pretty soon after the Iraq invasion.
Now, which is the modest assumption, and which should require the burden of truth?