Printable View
dln. saudi want us there. al qaeda don't they are very unhappy about it and was the greatest contributing factor in al qaeda becoming a terrorist group (saudi shunned al qaeda for the americans during the first gulf war and so putting americans on holy soil).
but the question still remains. are they morally comparable? did america perform an evil as great as 9-11. or were al qaeda doing nothing more than america had done 60 years before on a far larger scale?
Since I'm way too lazy to read this entire thread, I'll just point out my views from the initial post.
9/11 started a war. Hiroshima and Nagasaki ended one. There's a bit of difference there. Hiroshima and Nagasaki, while admittedly atrocities, wound up saving hundreds of thousands of lives that would have been lost in prolonged fighting. 9/11 just killed hundreds of innocents, and didn't even try to do anything to hamper our military strength, resulting in nothing more than thousands of innocent lives being lost, and the deaths of thousands more in the battles from then on. They are hardly equitible.
Don't forget that the goal of 9/11 was to cripple the US financially, not millitaristically(is that a word?). The US is "invading" their culture with American culture and one way they view stopping this is to remove the US's worldwide business power.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyblade
They are very different when you look at them from the US's point of view, but that's because the US was attacker for one and attackee for the other. When you look at it from the view point of those attacking, they aren't very different. The US placed a strategic strike to stop Japan from any world domination and Al-Qaeda and/or whomever placed a strategic strike to stop the US from any world domination. As far as 9/11 is concerned to those that coordinated the attacks, those people in the twin towers were soldiers attacking their culture and beliefs.
First, I believe 'militaristically' is a real word, but I suspect 'militarily' would be more apt there. Anyway, short English point over, that's probably the nub of the matter there Mr. Mullet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flying Mullet
But yes, it seems as though some people believe it easier to cripple the businesses who are 'invading' - and remember 9/11 did cause a fairly significant loss of confidence in the stock markets for awhile - rather than actually simply resisting the businesses in a more sensible way (Ie not buying their stuff.).
That's all I'm getting into on the matter.
Yeah, the 9/11 attacks were one hell of an opening strike. The difference is: it only pissed us off. Don't forget, there was an opening attrocity for our battle with Japan- Pearl Harbor. Granted, our assistance of the (re)creation of Israel was an attrocity in it's own right- and that's why so many of the Islamic world hate us so passionately.
They had justifications, we had justifications. The only real difference between 9/11 and the Hiroshima/Nagasaki attacks: our strategy worked, theirs didn't. Hence: ours saved lives (and it DID save lives in the long run)- theirs not only failed, it started a war. I wonder how the atomic bombings would have been looked at if all it did was create a rallying cry, a martyr-style attrocity, instead of crushing the Japanese will to fight.
Could you elaborate on this, and why you think that it is an atrocity please?Quote:
Originally Posted by udsuna
Wrong. I will say again, 9/11 started a war. Hiroshima and Nagasaki were an attempt to end the war. Even had they been unsuccessful, there is a difference. 9/11 can in no way be construed as an attempt to end a war or save lives, because there was no war until their attack.Quote:
Originally Posted by udsuna
You don't kill hundreds of people simply because you don't like the way they do business.
That depends upon your point of view. To those that orchestrated the attacks the war on their culture has been going on for years, so this could be seen as an attempt to stop it. I'm not arguing whether or not it was effective, rather the reasons for it. Again, when you look at it from the attackers point of view it is very similar. You keep looking at one from an attacker's standpoint and another from an attackee's standpoint. I guarantee you that those people that lived in Hiroshima and Nagasaki that didn't want anything to do with the war have the same view on the bombs as you do with 9/11.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyblade
Uh... do your homework. Millions of (entirely innocent) Islamic peoples living in Jerusalum and the surrounding area were forcefully removed from their homes. Ugly acts of violence on both sides. Many died. Not something Israel brags about- oh, they LOVE to talk about how they "took back" their holy land after a thousand or so years of exile- but they try to avoid the details on how they did it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyblade
And they COULD construe 9/11 as an act of war, if not to end the war, then at least to retaliate. As far as (fundamentalist) Islam is concerned: the war hasn't ended since the day they lost Jerusalum. And America is the obvious target- they view the Westerner/infidel/whatevers as a gang against them. Making the USA biggest bully of the bunch. The one you have to take down in order to make the others back off. Of course, they then got torn to shreds, but that's an entirely different story.
I think I'd liken the 9/11 attacks to the bombing of Pearl Harbor.
Not really. In WW2, America wasn't doing anything but sitting there merily in her own home. Well, not so merily, but still not doing anything. (actually, not true, we WERE actively opposing axis powers, just not openly- but that's another issue).
Before 9/11, we were grinding the arabic world under our heels, whether were did it directly or not. They retaliated, and caught us with our pants down, but it WAS retaliation. Maybe undeserved (that's for debate) but definately not unprevoked.
Yes, it was like Pearl Harbor- but not what most believe Pearl Harbor to be.
and here's a question about saving lives.
if i say to the us government tomorrow. "abondon your policy on africa or i bring down the empire state building" and the us government refuses. and then i bring down the empire state building. have i commited a crime close to the bombs or 9-11?
and what about dresden? didn't end anything.