RE: 9/11...What if it happens again

RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

FirmhandKY -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 12:49:52 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub I like to believe my thinking generally reflects the so-called silent majority. At least this has proven true for the last thirty years or so in America. If I do understand this mind set… then this is what America will demand if thousands die in another terrorist attack. There will be no borders that will not be crossed to root out terrorist. America will demand a full scale all out war. This means any country even suspected of harboring, supplying, or tolerating terrorists would be accountable. This could mean the annihilation of Iran, Syria, Pakistan, and the possibility of N. Korea and the restructuring of Saudi Arabia. Sadly it will be the only way to cut out the rot in that part of the world. My views I understand will not be popular here...hell they are not popular with me... but I think I am closer to reality then many others posting on this thread. It makes no difference if I come off like a warmonger...heavens knows I'm not...There comes a time, as in WWII, when diplomacy means weakness… come and take me. Despite what many may believe…if there is one thing Americans are not…is weak. Butch Panda isn't a Jacksonian. I think there would be some domestic repercussions, but I think you've got the final result exactly correct. From The Jacksonian Tradition by Walter Russell Mead Once wars begin, a significant element of American public opinion supports waging them at the highest possible level of intensity. The devastating tactics of the wars against the Indians, General Sherman’s campaign of 1864-65, and the unprecedented aerial bombardments of World War II were all broadly popular in the United States. During both the Korean and Vietnam Wars, presidents came under intense pressure, not only from military leaders but also from public opinion, to hit the enemy with all available force in all available places. Throughout the Cold War the path of least resistance in American politics was generally the more hawkish stance. Politicians who advocated negotiated compromises with the Soviet enemy were labeled appeasers and paid a heavy political price. The Korean and Vietnam Wars lost public support in part because of political decisions not to risk the consequences of all-out war, not necessarily stopping short of the use of nuclear weapons. The most costly decision George Bush took in the Gulf War was not to send ground forces into Iraq, but to stop short of the occupation of Baghdad and the capture and trial of Saddam Hussein. Firm

philosophy -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 1:24:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub Your personal vendetta against the US for contributions to the IRA is off topic. Often it seems when you are faced with an indefensible position you try to change the subject. ....well you put the subject on the table. i was suggesting that wisdom was an important, even vital adjunct to strength. It's not enough to have the power to smite people, it's important to have the wisdom to smite the right people. You then said this..... "This means any country even suspected of harboring, supplying, or tolerating terrorists would be accountable.:" .....now, as it is pretty much an accepted fact that US citizens funded both sets of terrorists in Ulster, then i called you on what appears to be hypocrisy. What right does the US have to hold other sovereign countries to account for the actions of its citizenry if the US refuses to hold its own citizens to the same standard? You may argue a version of 'might makes right', but that would just prove my point that a far too large proportion of US citizens fail to see that wisdom is as important as force.

FirmhandKY -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 1:30:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy .....now, as it is pretty much an accepted fact that US citizens funded both sets of terrorists in Ulster, then i called you on what appears to be hypocrisy. What right does the US have to hold other sovereign countries to account for the actions of its citizenry if the US refuses to hold its own citizens to the same standard? You may argue a version of 'might makes right', but that would just prove my point that a far too large proportion of US citizens fail to see that wisdom is as important as force. Yeah, but history is made by the ones with the force, even if they don't have "wisdom". Firm

philosophy -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 1:50:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: FirmhandKY quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy .....now, as it is pretty much an accepted fact that US citizens funded both sets of terrorists in Ulster, then i called you on what appears to be hypocrisy. What right does the US have to hold other sovereign countries to account for the actions of its citizenry if the US refuses to hold its own citizens to the same standard? You may argue a version of 'might makes right', but that would just prove my point that a far too large proportion of US citizens fail to see that wisdom is as important as force. Yeah, but history is made by the ones with the force, even if they don't have "wisdom". Firm ...in the short term certainly. However the long term tells a different story.

mnottertail -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 1:51:44 PM)
well, the iraquis and afghans are making just as much history as we. Ptolemy

SpinnerofTales -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 1:56:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy You then said this..... "This means any country even suspected of harboring, supplying, or tolerating terrorists would be accountable.:" Sorry, Philo...but you have missed a major fact of political life here. Always keep in mind that YOUR bomb weilding lunatics are terrorists. OUR bomb weilding lunatics are freedom fighters. Actually, some of our freedom fighers turn into terrorists. Let's remember just who taught Bin Laden to do more than drive car bombs or wear dynamite vests.

Politesub53 -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 1:58:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub If you are speaking about Irish terrorism, if the UK were strong enough to dictate to the US they would have... don't you agree? But I must tell you in this circumstance as always...two wrongs do not make a right...or might. Because the UK was weak does not mean we have to be. I for one dont agree, since you asked. The UK didnt use anywhere near the military capacity they had, to defeat the IRA. The reason being the rest of the UK would not have stood by and seen force used on that scale. You seem to view restraint as weakness and are unable to distinguish between the two. quote: I love talking to you on this forum but will not contribute to a discussion that is not about a repeat of 9/11. Your personal vendetta against the US for contributions to the IRA is off topic. Often it seems when you are faced with an indefensible position you try to change the subject. Butch You made the following quote "This means any country even suspected of harboring, supplying, or tolerating terrorists would be accountable." Phil quite rightly pointed out the word supplying, which was taking place on some scale. Your next move was to accuse him of going off topic, which in light of your own comments, was markedly on topic. Would you not say that inviting terrorists to St Patrick`s day parades was at the very least tolerating them ? ( Your word not mine )

Mercnbeth -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 2:16:46 PM)
quote: .....now, as it is pretty much an accepted fact that US citizens funded both sets of terrorists in Ulster, then i called you on what appears to be hypocrisy. What right does the US have to hold other sovereign countries to account for the actions of its citizenry if the US refuses to hold its own citizens to the same standard? Well then Philo, why wasn't there an embargo started by your country against the US? Why no other trade or travel restrictions? Does the refusal to act or impotence of one country require another to follow its example? There is no "right" that's why they call any such action an "act of war". A country does not commit terror, become a mercenary, or join in 'freedom fighting'; citizens of countries do. There is no "standard" to be held. If the powers that be thought the contributions to terrorism conducted in Ulster warranted a military response, they were within their rights to do so unilaterally and incur any consequences. The 'right' of any sovereign nation who weighs the facts and determines that is the appropriate action. I would expect you to give no less consideration to the thought process of the USA. Agreeing with the logic behind the action or the rationality of those making the decision isn't relevant. As this subject is obviously important to you and stipulating to relative ignorance regarding the comparison of 9/11 or future similar attacks to Ulster; why not enlighten me as well as the rest of us naive 'colonials' why there wasn't any organized push that I can recall from either side of the Ulster issue(since you represent we "funded both sets of terrorists") to react as you suggest?

mnottertail -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 2:18:49 PM)
why would they embargo the US when it was private citizens 'sorta lawfully' or at least not 'patently provably illegally' doing the money? Curiously, Ron

Mercnbeth -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 2:35:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail why would they embargo the US when it was private citizens 'sorta lawfully' or at least not 'patently provably illegally' doing the money? Curiously, Ron Another good point making the comparison irrelevant Ron, but then again, I didn't make the comparison.

philosophy -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 3:57:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail why would they embargo the US when it was private citizens 'sorta lawfully' or at least not 'patently provably illegally' doing the money? Curiously, Ron Another good point making the comparison irrelevant Ron, but then again, I didn't make the comparison. ...well Merc, i think you're conflating some seperate spheres of power. On the one had you have political expediency. On the other you have the ethical/moral sphere. Butch, it appeared to me, was arguing for an ethical/moral right to pursue those who support terrorism against the USA. As it happens i don't disagree. However if such a thing is claimed as an ethical right then it cuts both ways. The political sphere is less to do with concepts of right and wrong and more to do with ideas like pragmatism and expediency. It would have been a major political problem to embargo the super-power we were aligned with in order to do the ethically correct thing. In other words, the US bullied its way through the situation. Nowadays however, post 9-11, many Americans argue for a moral right to pursue terrorism......a right that they failed to recognise when it was either American citizens funding the terrorism (Ulster) or US government directly encouraging the terrorism (a number of countries in South America). Now Merc, you self-identify as a pragmatist........which seems to me to be a position that puts expediency above ethics. So i don't expect you to understand the hypocrisy of the US position on terrorism or why that hypocrisy is a problem. However, in my world view, the right thing to do is more important than the expedient thing. This is clearly an honest difference of opinion between us. Sadly the UK government took the pragmatic view. If i'd have been in power, i'd have slapped an embargo on US imports so fast it'd make your head spin. This is probably why i'd never stand a chance of being elected......lol

Mercnbeth -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 4:14:58 PM)
quote: This is clearly an honest difference of opinion between us. Sadly the UK government took the pragmatic view. If i'd have been in power, i'd have slapped an embargo on US imports so fast it'd make your head spin. This is probably why i'd never stand a chance of being elected......lol Fair enough Philo and a wonderful perspective regarding our philosophical difference which I can appreciate. However, amazing as it seems, we would have come to consider the same initial action at least, embargo. Illustrating that ethical and pragmatic has some fundamental things in common. Not the least of which - neither of us would stand a chance of bing elected.

philosophy -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 4:36:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Illustrating that ethical and pragmatic has some fundamental things in common. Not the least of which - neither of us would stand a chance of bing elected. ...t'is a pity......our debates would be legendary.....[:D]

kdsub -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 7:50:15 PM)
But you see Politesub I did not bring up the IRA in any way...Phil did... It makes no difference to me what has happened between the UK and the IRA in relation to 9/11. The IRA and the UK are totally irrelevant to the reactions of the US to another large-scale terrorist act resulting in thousands of deaths. It makes no difference if private citizens contributed to the mayhem in the UK…it will not affect or change our reaction to an attack. I don’t care and neither will the average American if there is a parallel between Americans contributions to the IRA and Iran’s support for terrorists. Understand the UK’s and Canada’s reaction will mean nothing it will be our reaction that will count and that is what this thread is about. Butch

Grofast -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 8:06:06 PM)
I would not ask if but when. Obama admistration witch hunt of the CIA is making those that have to get thier hands dirty hesitant to do what needs to be donei We are in a war with an enemy with little regard for thier own lives let alone ours. If attacked now under Obama it would be a disaster we have a president(yes i used lower case delibertly) who has not got the resolve to do what must be done. Bush may have been a bit of a dolt but at least he understood what must be done. Isreal has been fighting this kind of war fo almost 60 years maybe we ought to take advice in how to do it from them. The US military is a sledge hammer we should be using a scapel, you fight an uncoventional enemy with unconvetional means

kdsub -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 8:20:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: philosophy Butch, it appeared to me, was arguing for an ethical/moral right to pursue those who support terrorism against the USA. You are dead wrong here... I don’t give a rats ass about ethical or moral...neither will the American public. We will want...we will demand... and we will get revenge. I can only hope that we will get the leadership we also will demand…we didn’t get it last time. I am not ranting...I am dead serious and determined to assure it would not happen a third time. I know if thousands of Americans die millions around the world will die as well...the enemies of America would do well to believe that...God will not save them. Let them come up with alternate ways to address their grievances...rather then trying to force us with terrorism. Butch

MarsBonfire -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 9:18:42 PM)
Yeah, but history is made by the ones with the force, even if they don't have "wisdom". -Firm You're full of crap. -Ghandi

kdsub -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 9:31:19 PM)
If I'm not mistaken Gandi's contemporaries are fighting a different kind of war with terrorists...but you are right...if all Americans did a set down strike I'm sure the terrorists blades would dull after the first few million beheadings and they would give up... because of tired arms. On reflection did I go too far.... again.... Oh well one silly comment deserves another I guess. Butch

philosophy -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 9:36:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Grofast Isreal has been fighting this kind of war fo almost 60 years maybe we ought to take advice in how to do it from them. ....er.......60 years? And they still haven't won? Why would you want to take advice from a country that fails to win such a conflict? Surely a more sensible approach would be to look for examples of wars against terrorists that have actually been brought to a conclusion.

rulemylife -> RE: 9/11...What if it happens again (9/15/2009 11:37:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: servantforuse A terrorist attack right now in this Country would be a nightmare for the Obama administration. If he appears weak on national defence and we get hit again, his administration is done. Amazing how conservatives never considered Bush weak on national defense after 9/11 happened on his watch. Oh wait, I forgot, he was only in office too short a time to really get a handle on that whole terrorism thing. Isn't that the argument?

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875