9/11 serious post

[Munchlax]

I read the first post and the last page. You guys twist things into a large argument that doesn't have to happen

[Distriimuir]

I read the first post and the last page. You guys twist things into a large argument that doesn't have to happen

Actually seems pretty much still on topic, but yes this is the Internet and debates change shape!

[Gocougs509]

Then those killers keep killing.  And killing.  And killing.

Keep things in perspective.  Is it bad that innocents died?  Yes.  Should we have let terrorists do their thing?  No.

And the only reason innocents died was because the terrorists were taking the war into the cities.  It is their fault so many innocents died.  They have no appreciation for life.

So as revenge for 3000 deaths we take 2.5 million? Doesn't seen fair. We should let them kill until we catch them in the act.

Catch them in the act? How exactly are you supposed to catch the incinerated body of a suicide bomber in the act?

It's nowhere near as simple as you seem to think it is, and while you've done a good job at pointinf out many problems with the war on terror, you have yet to offer anything close to a could have been a better course of action. These aren't bank robbers, they are people who don't even value their own lives, let alone anyone else's.

You'll notice the masterminds of al queda did not burn to a crisp in a suicide bombing. You can do it and lose less lives.

Like I said before, you seem to be good at pointing out the problem over and over again, yet if the solution is as simple as you make it out to be, why have you not offered one?

Or is sitting back and doing nothing while terrorism runs rampant your idea of a 'solution'?

[Kaworu, the Fifth Child]

Then those killers keep killing.  And killing.  And killing.

Keep things in perspective.  Is it bad that innocents died?  Yes.  Should we have let terrorists do their thing?  No.

And the only reason innocents died was because the terrorists were taking the war into the cities.  It is their fault so many innocents died.  They have no appreciation for life.

So as revenge for 3000 deaths we take 2.5 million? Doesn't seen fair. We should let them kill until we catch them in the act.

Catch them in the act? How exactly are you supposed to catch the incinerated body of a suicide bomber in the act?

It's nowhere near as simple as you seem to think it is, and while you've done a good job at pointinf out many problems with the war on terror, you have yet to offer anything close to a could have been a better course of action. These aren't bank robbers, they are people who don't even value their own lives, let alone anyone else's.

You'll notice the masterminds of al queda did not burn to a crisp in a suicide bombing. You can do it and lose less lives.

Like I said before, you seem to be good at pointing out the problem over and over again, yet if the solution is as simple as you make it out to be, why have you not offered one?

Or is sitting back and doing nothing while terrorism runs rampant your idea of a 'solution'?

Maybe, my solution is that we should have tried to work with the innocents in that region to find them instead of massacre them.

[LinkCelestrial]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

[Rass]

Then those killers keep killing.  And killing.  And killing.

Keep things in perspective.  Is it bad that innocents died?  Yes.  Should we have let terrorists do their thing?  No.

And the only reason innocents died was because the terrorists were taking the war into the cities.  It is their fault so many innocents died.  They have no appreciation for life.

So as revenge for 3000 deaths we take 2.5 million? Doesn't seen fair. We should let them kill until we catch them in the act.

Catch them in the act? How exactly are you supposed to catch the incinerated body of a suicide bomber in the act?

It's nowhere near as simple as you seem to think it is, and while you've done a good job at pointinf out many problems with the war on terror, you have yet to offer anything close to a could have been a better course of action. These aren't bank robbers, they are people who don't even value their own lives, let alone anyone else's.

You'll notice the masterminds of al queda did not burn to a crisp in a suicide bombing. You can do it and lose less lives.

Like I said before, you seem to be good at pointing out the problem over and over again, yet if the solution is as simple as you make it out to be, why have you not offered one?

Or is sitting back and doing nothing while terrorism runs rampant your idea of a 'solution'?

Maybe, my solution is that we should have tried to work with the innocents in that region to find them instead of massacre them.

That is how bin Laden got his start. He was funded by the US.

[Kaworu, the Fifth Child]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

Less people would die with my solution of working with the innocents.

[NovusOrbis]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

Less people would die with my solution of working with the innocents.

Everything sounds good on paper.

[Gocougs509]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

Less people would die with my solution of working with the innocents.

Everything sounds good on paper.

This.

This right here.

[Kaworu, the Fifth Child]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

Less people would die with my solution of working with the innocents.

Everything sounds good on paper.

That's fair.

[LinkCelestrial]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

Less people would die with my solution of working with the innocents.

Everything sounds good on paper.

That's fair.

Working with the innocents? How?

[Kaworu, the Fifth Child]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

Less people would die with my solution of working with the innocents.

Everything sounds good on paper.

That's fair.

Working with the innocents? How?

Treating them well, for a start.

[LinkCelestrial]

You cannot deal with terrorism without innocent people dying. If you don't deal with the terrorists, people die. If you try and deal with the terrorists, they hide behind innocent people.

It is a lose lose situation and nobody has the right solution.

America could have launched a stealth mission, using snipers and spies to try and track down the leaders. But what then? It'd have to be completely secret, and the American people would think that they were just sitting there, doing nothing.

I don't know what the solution is. But the terrorists are very smart. They don't value innocent lives.

The worst things you can imagine happen to snipers and spies that get caught.

Less people would die with my solution of working with the innocents.

Everything sounds good on paper.

That's fair.

Working with the innocents? How?

Treating them well, for a start.

I'm sorry, was America supposed to show up and start handing out cookies? I'm really not seeing this.

The only way to deal with innocents is to get them out of the way. They don't move, there is crossfire, that's how war works.

Am I being harsh? No. I'm being blunt.

I suppose they could have warned them, but then the terrorists know too.

As I said before, it's a lose lose. Don't pretend that there's some magical solution where all the bad guys stop being bad and everyone lives happily ever after. That's not how life works.

Don't take this the wrong way. I don't think America did the right thing. But I'm hard pressed to find a better solution and working with the innocents and treating them better really isn't how it works.

The terrorist put people in the way and America kept going. What other choices did they have? I'm sure lives could have been spared but they weren't, and saying they could have treated them better doesn't and won't change that.

War is hell.

[LinkCelestrial]

I find it funny that as far this conversation is concerned, Wahhabism and the radical Islam they propose are some abstract evil that birthed itself in a vacuum...

How do you mean?

"Bad guys" "Terrorists" as if there is some amorphous group whose sole purpose was to hurt Amercans. No, there's no disenfranchised masses who saw our invasion as a massive recruiting poster. There's no inflated threat which we handled in the worst way possible when public opinion was on our side. There's no decades long history of western imperialism into the Middle East that helped bring about this anti-US sentiment. We didn't poke a hornets for decades and expect to not get stung. No, we just have a bunch of meanies who want to hurt us. Now, before you take this the wrong way, let me make this absolutely clear: I abhore what happened on 9/11. I cry when I read about it still. But that doesn't change the fact that this two-dimensional "good guys" v. "terrorists" mentality is over-simplistic and, coupled with the idea that violence is the only answer, is doing more harm than good.

I never claimed that America is the good guys. I know they had a hidden agenda and I don't agree with a lot of what they've done.

That being said there's a religion devoted to the annihilation of America and Israel. As far as I'm concerned if somebody wants to kill me, my family and everyone else around me, they're the bad guy in my life story.

I'm not even American. I'm Canadian. The other thing that Jihadists (specifically ISIS) are doing right now is massacring Christians.

When somebody decides, for whatever messed up reason, that you need to die, what's the proper response?

I don't see an option outside of fighting fire with fire but can you honestly come up with a better one?

Would you sit back knowing somebody was going to strap a bomb to their chest and come after your family? I wouldn't.

I wish there was a way that this could be resolved peacefully and that Jihadists would change there ways, but outside of an act of God I don't see it happening. It sadness me and it sickness me.

Until they stop tying to kill people they are the bad guy, and they will be treated as such.

I mean, to them Americans are the bad guys. It's all a matter of perspective. America made enemies, they have to deal with them.

[LinkCelestrial]

Did it ever occur to you that Israel is just as much at fault? That Zionism is one of the most wrong-headed movements ever conceived? They've reached the state of strapping bombs on people because of a multitude of reasons. Your gross over-simplification for justifying violence is the same as any despot. Leaving the Middle East alone and restraining Israel would certainly help in ratcheting down tensions and not give violent groups living artillery dispensing billboards for recruitment.

I wasn't familiar with the term Zionism until now. From my google crash course it's Jews wanting to live in Israel. Not seeing the problem, even though I don't agree with it. Is there some sort of radical movement I'm not familiar with?

I never said America was the victim. They've been fueling the fire. But if all both sides do is stoke the flames then what?

My gross over-simplification for justifying violence? Explain to me when I over-simplified. Correct me if you're going to say such things.

America can't really afford to leave the Middle East alone. They're too heavily invested in it. That being said it would certainly help if they worked on their public image over there. (By that I basically mean "were a lot nicer")

Restraining Israel? From doing what? Don't you think restraining Israel might make an enemy of say, Israel?