9/11 Theories

[Greatscott]

I feel war was justified,IMO it was justified when osama tried to hit the trade center the 1st time.And justified after hitting the cole...it depends on your leadership.

Yup, I agree, and I think we should still have 24-hour B-2 and B-52 bombing raids in Afghanistan, when the pilots no longer have to worry about hitting mountains, then we can stop... Its not like we were after the spoils of war, I don't think we are trying to corner the world opium market. Sad to say we had Al Qaeda on the ropes, but we pulled most of our resources out for the invasion and occupation of Iraq and its WMD's, of which, I don't think we have even found a can of Raid, to say nothing of the stockpiles of chemicals we claimed Iraq had as a justification for invasion.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

Yup, I agree, and I think we should still have 24-hour B-2 and B-52 bombing raids in Afghanistan, when the pilots no longer have to worry about hitting mountains, then we can stop...

So you're ok with killing innocent civilians in the hunt for our enemies?

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

I guess you need to brush up on your history. Ever heard of ESSO? Now Exxon which sold chemicals to the Germans in WWI to make av gas which in turn killed Americans.

Actually that was Standard Oil, owned by John Rockerfeller.

Throughout history its been noted that quite a few Americans have played both sides of a war for profit. JP Morgan did it too.

 

[Greatscott]

That, of course was an exaggeration. Those who are not Al Qeada or Taliban are just trying to make it in the world, just like we are. The point of my statement is we should have not gone into Iraq and let up our pressure on Al Qeada.

It is an interesting question and people don't want to ask themselves...
If there was a switch you could throw that would prevent all Al Qeada attacks in the US, but would cost 100,000 innocent Afghani lives; would you throw the switch? What if you knew another 9/11-style/sized attack was imminent if you didn't throw the switch?

 

[vonclod]

That, of course was an exaggeration. Those who are not Al Qeada or Taliban are just trying to make it in the world, just like we are. The point of my statement is we should have not gone into Iraq and let up our pressure on Al Qeada.

It is an interesting question and people don't want to ask themselves...
If there was a switch you could throw that would prevent all Al Qeada attacks in the US, but would cost 100,000 innocent Afghani lives; would you throw the switch? What if you knew another 9/11-style/sized attack was imminent if you didn't throw the switch?

you dont think you might make new enemys by doing this?..nothing justifies killing innocents on either side

 

[Greatscott]

The question is not political, it is more humanistic, are you willing to sacrifice that many lives to save our own?

 

[rock hard]

you dont think you might make new enemys by doing this?

Enemys yes,but they would know the consequence of messing with us.

Fact is that enocent life will be lost on battle,to suggest otherwise is looking blindly at the history of war.

 

[vonclod]

The question is not political, it is more humanistic, are you willing to sacrifice that many lives to save our own?

i,d like to think no..what makes me so special

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

It is an interesting question and people don't want to ask themselves... If there was a switch you could throw that would prevent all Al Qeada attacks in the US, but would cost 100,000 innocent Afghani lives; would you throw the switch? What if you knew another 9/11-style/sized attack was imminent if you didn't throw the switch?

No. Afghani lives aren't worth any more or less than American lives.

It also wouldn't change anything. The Taliban doesn't give two shits about their local people, otherwise they wouldn't have drawn us into their lands for a fight.

To be completely cold about things, the lives lost on 9/11 were not that many if put into scale with the US population. Damage to property was minimal. 4 planes, a few buildings, a hole in the Pentagon and another in Pennsylvania, and a big dirty mess in NYC. As great of a nation as we claim to be, we could easily have shrugged that off and waited for an opportune time to strike back. Had we done that, we wouldn't have lost several thousand soldiers and many billions of dollars.

 

[cbr6fs]

So you're ok with killing innocent civilians in the hunt for our enemies?

+1

Only thing bombing does is breed hate.

Problem is though, in this day and age politicians only care about themselves rather than their legacy, so they want quick results and to hell with the future.


The ONLY long term solution is hearts and minds, a plan that was starting to work but got shelved as elections were fast approaching.


On the subject of 9/11 theories.
At the risk of sounding callous i really don't care.

What i mean by that is, it really makes no difference to those that died that day and are still dying.
If it's a web of lies then in the end the truth will come out as it always does, if there was/is a cover up then eventually someone will be aggrieved enough to start talking, it's just human nature.

A very good friend of mine witnessed the plane before it hit the Pentagon, i know him and his family like they were my own.
So i'm in absolutely no doubt it was a plane that hit.
Why there wasn't a bigger hole, more debris etc i have no idea.

Why the WTC towers collapsed so quickly i also have no idea.
I've heard stories from CIA cover up's to the owners intentionally levelling it to claim on the insurance.
As i said before though i can't see it myself, it would just need too many people to set up and carry out, 1 would speak eventually.


What i am sure of is there is absolutely no justification for the acts that were carried out.
But the USA's foreign policy certainly gave mad men the training, and crazy foooooked up reasoning behind the attacks.

The US has been funding, training and supplying world terrorism for decades, be it the IRA, Mujahideen, Korea, Iraq, Cuba etc etc etc.

Again there is absolutely no justification for those actions, but if you play with fire often enough then it's when you get burnt not if.

 

[vonclod]

Enemys yes,but they would know the consequence of messing with us.

Fact is that enocent life will be lost on battle,to suggest otherwise is looking blindly at the history of war.

im not sure what the concerquenses are..still there job not done..never will be done so who accomplished what?..the talibal or al queda is not scared of you..the people there just want to live period, if you go that route you will have bigger problems..its an immpossible question anyway, they are too spread out

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

Fact is that enocent life will be lost on battle,to suggest otherwise is looking blindly at the history of war.

Killing innocents is a poor tactic employed by a sloppy military, it does nothing to your advantage other than the hope that you managed to get a few baddies in the process. If you're trying to root out enemies, chances are that they are also looked down upon by the locals, so it is in your best interest to get them on your side, not wipe them out.

 

[rock hard]

No. Afghani lives aren't worth any more or less than American lives.

It also wouldn't change anything. The Taliban doesn't give two shits about their local people, otherwise they wouldn't have drawn us into their lands for a fight.

To be completely cold about things, the lives lost on 9/11 were not that many if put into scale with the US population. Damage to property was minimal. 4 planes, a few buildings, a hole in the Pentagon and another in Pennsylvania, and a big dirty mess in NYC. As great of a nation as we claim to be, we could easily have shrugged that off and waited for an opportune time to strike back. Had we done that, we wouldn't have lost several thousand soldiers and many billions of dollars.

I'm just glad you,and people like you arnt on powr all the time,or we would get walked over constantly.Liberals have no backbone,no stomack for war.

The billoins you say we spent are small in comparison to your presidents wortless stimulous. and I dare say the billions spent on war was all on americans for the most part.Where as lots spend on the stimulus went to various contruction projects....amd there for helped support alot of workers who afre here illegally.

A strong and WILLING miliary is imprtant to have and USE to insure our enemys stay in thier place of the worlds pecking order.

 

[rock hard]

Killing innocents is a poor tactic employed by a sloppy military, it does nothing to your advantage other than the hope that you managed to get a few baddies in the process. If you're trying to root out enemies, chances are that they are also looked down upon by the locals, so it is in your best interest to get them on your side, not wipe them out.

:roll:

even if it not meant,or desired,inocent life WILL always be lost in times of war,nothing one says or does can change that:roll:

It is good to hope for otherwise,but to consider it possible is nieve.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

I'm just glad you,and people like you arnt on powr all the time,or we would get walked over constantly.Liberals have no backbone,no stomack for war.

The billoins you say we spent are small in comparison to your presidents wortless stimulous. and I dare say the billions spent on war was all on americans for the most part.Where as lots spend on the stimulus went to various contruction projects....amd there for helped support alot of workers who afre here illegally.

A strong and WILLING miliary is imprtant to have and USE to insure our enemys stay in thier place of the worlds pecking order.

I'm talking military tactics, not political posturing. The Taliban are not nor ever were capable of anything close to a full scale attack on us. The best they could ever do was to take small shots. They wanted to provoke us to come fight in their backyard where they had the advantage and they did just that. There was absolutely no reason to go balls out on them.

Now if we were talking about a fully armed, fully mobile country making threats and potentially invading our soil, then yes, put a boot up their ass post haste.

Don't drag your liberal/conservative bullshit into this discussion. Its old, its tiring, and this is not the time or place.

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

:roll:

even if it not meant,or desired,inocent life WILL always be lost in times of war,nothing one says or does can change that:roll:

It is good to hope for otherwise,but to consider it possible is nieve.

Yes it happens and is unavoidable to a point. But if you go back and study history again you'll find more than a few who made it a point to kill anyone in their path, innocent or no.

 

[rock hard]

I'm talking military tactics, not political posturing. The Taliban are not nor ever were capable of anything close to a full scale attack on us. The best they could ever do was to take small shots. They wanted to provoke us to come fight in their backyard where they had the advantage and they did just that. There was absolutely no reason to go balls out on them.

Now if we were talking about a fully armed, fully mobile country making threats and potentially invading our soil, then yes, put a boot up their ass post haste.

Don't drag your liberal/conservative bullshit into this discussion. Its old, its tiring, and this is not the time or place.

See,its all a mater of perception,alot of liberals think just like you..its a fact.

and alot of people you disagree with,like me,are republicans.
I say they wanted to hurt out economy and make a statment,and they did.
I dont think they wanted a fight in thier back yard....And I think they showed on 911 they afre capable of more than just popping a few shots.

They are a network,and have a set # of resources.
Just as a company has limited resources,and tacking from that limits thier abilty to do more.

The taliban also has a limited # of resources,and by having the us on thier gorund,means they have to spend alot oof thier rescources thier,otherwise thiere is telling what they could have done to us,and our allies these last several yrs if they could have soend more of those resources focusing on another attck.

 

[vonclod]

$1,251,163,583,176 ..thats the estimated cost of the war so far..its just under 10% of your entire national debt

 

[vonclod]

Yes it happens and is unavoidable to a point. But if you go back and study history again you'll find more than a few who made it a point to kill anyone in their path, innocent or no.

and history doest look kindly on those who did things that way

 

[Duuuuuuuude]

See,its all a mater of perception,alot of liberals think just like you..its a fact.

and alot of people you disagree with,like me,are republicans.
I say they wanted to hurt out economy and make a statment,and they did.
I dont think they wanted a fight in thier back yard....And I think they showed on 911 they afre capable of more than just popping a few shots.

All out war should be method of last resort. That's part of what puts the "civil" in "civilization". I could give a flippin' fawk whether or not that is a liberal ideal or not. Wars cost money and lives. Both of those are better spent doing other things. If war is a must, then do it. If its not, then don't.

Like you say, they wanted to hurt our economy and make a statement. They did both because we allowed them to. Its been 10 years and we are still fighting them. I think its safe to say we've suffered more for it than they have.

If they wanted to do lasting physical damage they would have targeted different locations.

They are a network,and have a set # of resources.
Just as a company has limited resources,and tacking from that limits thier abilty to do more.

The taliban also has a limited # of resources,and by having the us on thier gorund,means they have to spend alot oof thier rescources thier,otherwise thiere is telling what they could have done to us,and our allies these last several yrs if they could have soend more of those resources focusing on another attck.

Like I said, its been 10 years and they are still active. Apparently they have more resources than you think.