"As far as we know Al Qaeda in Iraq was non-existent prior to our neo-con's manufactured war."

Well, I'll agree that as far as Bowser, Buck, and perhaps many others know Al Qaeda was non-existent in Iraq.
But the reason for invading Iraq wasn't because Al Qaeda was in Iraq. Now, the reason the US invaded Afghanistan *was* because Al Qaeda was in Afghanistan. But merely because Al Qaeda was in Afghanistan wasn't the sole reason for invading Afghanistan. Perhaps some with recall that Clinton bombed Al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan- the bombing was mostly ineffective because they were given a heads up hours before the missiles got there. The reason for invading Afghanistan was to get rid of this capability for Al Qaeda to continue these training terrorists.

Now, before invading Afghanistan, how many terrorist were trained in these camps?
One number I heard was about 400,000. Maybe that's a wrong number. Maybe it's more, maybe it's less. Whatever the number, these terrorist weren't from Afghanistan nor were they planning on staying there. But rather they would come from all parts of the world to Afghanistan then after training would return to home countries, or fight in Afghanistan or go elsewhere.

Now, here it gives 60,000 number:
"The al Qaeda leadership did not anticipate the rapid collapse of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan in the fall of 2001. Up to that point, Afghanistan had been a fertile breeding ground for the organization. According to some estimates, al Qaeda had trained up to 60,000 jihadists there."
Strikes Back

Btw, the article against Bush's policy.

Hmm, even a lower number:
U.S. intelligence estimates put the total number of fighters who underwent instruction in Bin Ladin -- supported camps in Afghanistan from 1996 through 9/11 at 10,000 to 20,000.
AL QAEDA'S RENEWAL

Oh, btw, the above article also says:
"In mid-1998, the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative. In March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin's Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air attacks in December."

And btw:
"In addition to training fighters and special operators, this larger network of guesthouses and camps provided a mechanism by which al Qaeda could screen and vet candidates for induction into its own organization.Thousands flowed through the camps, but no more than a few hundred seem to have become al Qaeda members. From the time of its founding, al Qaeda had employed training and indoctrination to identify "worthy" candidates."

Anyways, I couldn't find the reference for 400,000 number.
Returning to the point.
The purpose for invading Iraq was to remove Saddam from power. And reason to remove Saddam from power was he was violating the cease fire agreement. And btw the reason Iraq had UN sanctions was solely due to his continuing violation of that same cease fire agreement. And the reason why the Clinton Adminstration had reached the conclusion that US policy should be to remove Saddam from power, was, yes, due to the fact that Saddam was continuing to fail to follow that cease fire agreement.

Next:
"Unfortunately, there can be little doubt that today Iraq is a central battleground in the war on terror."

That's debatable. Al Qaeda may be already defeated in Iraq. It's true they may be regrouping. And it's possible that the worse single type attack may yet come in Iraq. But I think it's fairly obvious that even if al Qaeda fades out of Iraq, they aren't finished. I would say that what al Qaeda needs is somewhere to base it's operations. The plan to use Iraq seems to have mostly failed at this point.
But even without Al Qaeda being much of factor in Iraq, Iraq still needs to get more political stability- and of course you have other powers in the region which may involve themselves in unhelpful ways in Iraq.
The central battleground on terror may shift back to Afghanistan. As I've said before, Afghanistan is going to take a much longer time than Iraq. Now, you could say that Pakistan is central battleground in war on terror- it's just the US at the moment and perhaps for very long time isn't going to have much say in that battle. Maybe it's major input in the battle in Pakistan is by maintaining and improving the stability in Afghanistan.
Of course in terms of exporting terrorism, Iran has always been a major source of this. Iran's major power in the region involves the Shia. The Shia are of course the majority in Iraq; and rather than use the rather ineffective method of terrorism, political dialog- or soft power may be employed by Iraq to better results to resolve Shia issues in the region.