9/11 beer
- Thread starter quickTRADER
- Start date
Dan...you and I usually agree on most issues. Which is significant in that I look at things generally from the left and you from the right.
But here, I disagree, not with your reasoning, which has some logical validity on the surface, but with your failure to see the enormous significance of these events.
9/11 was certainly an emotional event for Americans. No doubt about that. But to answer your question; would these events have been so abhorrent had they taken down the twin towers in Kuala Lumpur....the answer is absolutely!!! Because the effect would have been the same. But of course, the likelihood of that having happened is far smaller because the WTC had more of a symbolic attraction as a target. Like most Americans, I don't even know the real name of Malaysias twin towers. Just that they are tall, and are twins. However, the mass murder of innocent non-combatants is anathema to our way of life. Doesn't matter where it is. America gets a bad rap, but look at our recent military actions. Look at Bosnia, etc. Here we went to try and prevent the mass murders that occurred. We really DO fight for freedom. And ironically, we have been fighting a lot lately to protect Muslims all over eastern Europe, and Asia. But these facts don't seem to work conveniently for the true enemies we have....these corrupt leaders I so despise. So attention gets diverted from what is, to what works. Example.....America supports Israel. Israel represses the Palestinians. The Palestinians are Muslims. So America is the enemy of Muslims. All very convenient. And all a total crock of BS.
As for the A-bombs on Japan. This is a question no one but Truman and a very few tacticians can ever answer satisfactorily. And they are all dead. So history will eventually sort it out (maybe). What were the reasons? The "popular" reason was it would shorten the war, and thus save countless American lives that would have been lost in an invasion of Japan. And Japan had their populace prepared to fight for their emperor to the very last man standing. So if that were really true (or truly believed), then yes, the A-bomb was a justifiable act.
If, however, Japan was ready to surrender, as goes another theory, then what was the purpose (if any). Even MacArthur did not want to use the bomb.
So was this a preemptive demonstration to the then anticipated new "foe"....the USSR....not to screw with us? Maybe.
We will never know for sure, because we can't read minds of men long deceased.
But, keep in mind, while I do not defend the use of the A-bomb in Japan.....we were at war. A declared war provoked by a criminal sneak attack. We also gave warning to the inhabitants and the government of Japan. We seriously considered a demonstration to dissuade the Japanese from continuing the war. I don't recall the reasons this alternative was not taken. But I do know much agonizing went into the decision to drop the bombs.
What bothers me now, is that our "new war" plans...specifically Iraq (particularly as opposed to Korea, which seems a greater potential threat), is about natural resources.
Why did Japan go to war? They needed natural resources. Have we become them? Do we now have an emperor too?
I say, resolve it all, and elect Rs7 President in '04!!!!
Peace,
rs7Very true.....I have a friend that could not attend the 40+ funerals he felt he needed to. Too many in too little time. I myself only knew one victim personally. But still, one too many. A friend, and a truly fine person.
And every time I think about him, I can't help but ask myself "why?" And there is no answer.
I was at ground zero in the middle of October...4 or 5 weeks after the event. The fires were still burning and the smell will stay with me forever.
As for someone's comment on 9/11 "stuff" on EBAY....I can't even respond to that without getting nasty, so I won't. I couldn't even bring myself to take pictures there. Let alone think about picking up a pebble that could have been a bone fragment or God knows what. And the police did an admirable job of moving people along. They really were heros...along with the firefighters of course.
God Bless America....
peace,
Rs7
Quote from rs7:
er, no. i'm not denying that the events are significant. obviously they are extremely significant. in fact, it's that very significance which i am questioning (the reasoning behind it)..
are you speaking for yourself here? in that case ok. but i just cannot for the life of me imagine that there would have been such an outcry (would we have gone to afghanistan? or permitted malaysia to?) by americans had the attacks taken place elsewhere. not even close.
and i'm not criticising that. murders happen all the time, but if my father was murdered i'd would obviously have a greater emotional impact on me than some stranger's father. but would it be 'right' of me to go around pretending that this was the most significant murder ever? you know, a "stop the world" kind of reaction?
is this how you intend to prove that "it's all about power"? i find that totally unconvincing..
it's not the people in power that are going around committing these actions.. the 'common' people themselves are totally convinced of the rectitude of their cause.
hardly "coutless".
and that could so easily have been avoided were it not for US instance on unconditional surrender. i regard the decision to require unconditional surrender as a complete gaff, especially the adminstration was warned against it by people that were actually aware of the japanese mindset regarding their emperor (living god etc..).
whether or not they were ready to surrender, all but the most intransigent japanese militarists realized, from about late '44, that there was no way in hell japan could win..
yeah, i've read some well argued stuff supporting that view.
a "declared" war, hmm i'm not so sure that really counts for much.
what does it really mean? some of the citizens of a particular country admit that they are going to attack you, right?
i think we've got a very similar case right now with al-qaeda, only their citizens don't all live in the one country, but they are certainly united by a common cause. and i think they'd pretty much declared, or at least shown by their actions, prior to 9/11 that they were at war with us.
did we give a warning? i'll have to check that.
in any case, 'right' or 'wrong', the bombings killed a minimum of 100,000 (between the two) on impact, and more later through radiation. surely the vast majority of those would have been completely innocent wouldn't they?
and if you excuse hiroshima, then how do you justify nagasaki? they just couldn't hold for any longer than three days later??
can there be any doubt that had it been germany who dropped them on america that the people behind it would have been charged with war crimes??
you talked about events in history that i'm not disputing. i dont think you realy showed me how 9/11 was a worse act than hiroshima and nagasaki.. which was what i wanted. if anything, i regard hiroshima and nagasaki as a lot worse, to be honest.
again, the whole point of bringing this up is to say that america needs to grow up and get over 9/11. and it does. desperately.
the bush camp has had a field day milking the event for every political point it's worth, but come on fellas, time to wake up and realize that the world didn't stop spinning when a few thousand fat ass americans died..
er, no. i'm not denying that the events are significant. obviously they are extremely significant. in fact, it's that very significance which i am questioning (the reasoning behind it)..
are you speaking for yourself here? in that case ok. but i just cannot for the life of me imagine that there would have been such an outcry (would we have gone to afghanistan? or permitted malaysia to?) by americans had the attacks taken place elsewhere. not even close.
and i'm not criticising that. murders happen all the time, but if my father was murdered i'd would obviously have a greater emotional impact on me than some stranger's father. but would it be 'right' of me to go around pretending that this was the most significant murder ever? you know, a "stop the world" kind of reaction?
is this how you intend to prove that "it's all about power"? i find that totally unconvincing..
it's not the people in power that are going around committing these actions.. the 'common' people themselves are totally convinced of the rectitude of their cause.
hardly "coutless".
and that could so easily have been avoided were it not for US instance on unconditional surrender. i regard the decision to require unconditional surrender as a complete gaff, especially the adminstration was warned against it by people that were actually aware of the japanese mindset regarding their emperor (living god etc..).
whether or not they were ready to surrender, all but the most intransigent japanese militarists realized, from about late '44, that there was no way in hell japan could win..
yeah, i've read some well argued stuff supporting that view.
a "declared" war, hmm i'm not so sure that really counts for much.
what does it really mean? some of the citizens of a particular country admit that they are going to attack you, right?
i think we've got a very similar case right now with al-qaeda, only their citizens don't all live in the one country, but they are certainly united by a common cause. and i think they'd pretty much declared, or at least shown by their actions, prior to 9/11 that they were at war with us.
did we give a warning? i'll have to check that.
in any case, 'right' or 'wrong', the bombings killed a minimum of 100,000 (between the two) on impact, and more later through radiation. surely the vast majority of those would have been completely innocent wouldn't they?
and if you excuse hiroshima, then how do you justify nagasaki? they just couldn't hold for any longer than three days later??
can there be any doubt that had it been germany who dropped them on america that the people behind it would have been charged with war crimes??
you talked about events in history that i'm not disputing. i dont think you realy showed me how 9/11 was a worse act than hiroshima and nagasaki.. which was what i wanted. if anything, i regard hiroshima and nagasaki as a lot worse, to be honest.
again, the whole point of bringing this up is to say that america needs to grow up and get over 9/11. and it does. desperately.
the bush camp has had a field day milking the event for every political point it's worth, but come on fellas, time to wake up and realize that the world didn't stop spinning when a few thousand fat ass americans died..
I call that the LYRICS TO A SONG. And yeah, I don't have to believe in religion to believe in God (which I am not sure about in any event....I am not sure I believe or disbelieve....how can any of us know for sure? I just know for me "He" isn't the "god" as described in the bible, the koran, etc.)
But yes Dan...it's a sentiment...not a real belief. Excuse me for using it. Sort of like saying "I will kill you if you bother me again"...you don't mean it literally...you just are making a point.
So let me rephrase:
Bless Freedom. Bless Liberty. (Whoever is in charge!)
(how's that?)
Peace,
Rs7
Exactly my point. But who is encouraging these "common" people, and why are they doing it? Sure they are convinced. Look at their textbooks. Their upbringing. Their whole life experience of learning to hate and to want to fight.
And why are those in power not participating directly? Or even owning up to it. I will tell you why....BAD FOR BUSINESS!!!
Daniel, I respect your ability greatly to reason things out. Tell me who benefits from suicide bombers....the bombers themselves? Or those that send them (and occasionally compensate their families).?
As for "America is the enemy because they support Israel"....don't be so naive. This is indeed the case. You know I do not do cut and paste jobs. But believe me, if you want some very convincing arguments for this reasoning, I will PM them to you.
As I think you are aware, my wife works in American/Israeli relations. You would be quite amazed at what really goes on behind the scenes. Of course, a lot of what I hear I cannot discuss. Not that it is classified, but negotiations go on non stop. And I would be remiss for making statements that are accurate to my knowledge right now, and can be completely inaccurate by the time you read them. Things are moving fast. Also, it is not my place to pass on "hearsay", which, really is all it is coming from me. Most of what she tells me is far over my head. I don't understand the politics of diplomacy. (But I will study up for my run for the presidency in '04
)But let's start with a simple question......
George Bush Sr. did NOT support Israel to any extent other than what was already in place. He lived with past policies. Dubya does STRONGLY. Why?
Peace,
rs7