Did Americans Really Handle it Well??

[Sui Generis]

I agree with Gohans Girl's post...I mean yes I am American..yes I lost somebody in the whole deal BUT its not gonna make it any better by doing the same thing to other people!! I mean its like us saying "Yeah its ok to kill, if someone killed first"...Its pathetic...we sit on our butts in America and blame all these innocent people...when the only people to blame were the hi-jackers....I think its stupid that we need to fidn someone living to blame...yes I think Osama should go to hell...but I don't think we should torture him....I mean think about how many countries think we are idiots right now! We look stupid to the world all we are doing is striking out hoping we will kill someone....Whats up with that....why is that ok...but murder isn't?

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DuoGod of Death [/i]
[B]We look stupid to the world all we are doing is striking out hoping we will kill someone....Whats up with that....why is that ok...but murder isn't? [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]Bear in mind that International military forces outnumber US military forces in the Persian Gulf.

The USA isn't undergoing the mission in Afghanistan alone...there are something like 20 different countries involved.

Also, I really don't think you can say that the USA and its allies are striking out with the hope of hitting something...any strike that is performed is very precise and deliberate.

I'm glad that the forces are over there and I hope that they totally wipe out any forces which would seek to ruin the country all over again.[/color]

[Stitch]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]

[color=royalblue]Bear in mind that International military forces outnumber US military forces in the Persian Gulf.

The USA isn't undergoing the mission in Afghanistan alone...there are something like 20 different countries involved.

Also, I really don't think you can say that the USA and its allies are striking out with the hope of hitting something...any strike that is performed is very precise and deliberate.

I'm glad that the forces are over there and I hope that they totally wipe out any forces which would seek to ruin the country all over again.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]
yes james but it is still murder every time the don't hit somthing they want but i guess it is a matter of opinion!!

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ~Gohans Gurl~ [/i]
[B]
yes james but it is still murder every time the don't hit somthing they want but i guess it is a matter of opinion!! [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]I see where you are coming from since I tend to see both sides of situations, but I think you may be highly bias toward Afghanistan. While we aren't exactly innocent of irritating their country, neither are they. They made a not-so-wise decision to destroy something very dear to America, knowing full well that our military power far exceeds theirs.

You also have to understand that the Afghan people have basically been brought up to hate Americans, and any country that helps us out. The Taliban didn't allow any televisions, radios, or computers while they were in power, just so that people couldn't think for themselves about what was going on in the world outside of Afghanistan.

I [i]do[/i] remember once seeing a newscast on CNN about a woman in Afghanistan who was interviewed shortly after 9-11. A reporter asked her if she understood what happened in New York and she didn't know. The reporter informed her that two buildings had been hit and had collapsed. The woman responded, "So? Look at all of these buildings behind me. They have all been destroyed too!" Refering to the bombed buildings of Kandahar.

Both sides are guilty of doing things to destroy the other country. The only justification we have is that ours is during war-time, and their action of flying planes into the WTC was not.[/color]

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by ~Gohans Gurl~ [/i]
[B]
yes james but it is still murder every time the don't hit somthing they want but i guess it is a matter of opinion!! [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]You can't call it murder.

Murder is pre-meditated killing of someone. If it's accidental, it's not murder.

And frankly..what would you rather...having the Taliban regime still in place, oppressing its own people and allowing terrorism to flourish (which would potentially make 9/11 look like child's play)...or would you rather go in there and fix the problem (even IF a few people are accidentally killed).

I know I'd rather the latter.[/color]

[QUOTE][B]I see where you are coming from since I tend to see both sides of situations, but I think you may be highly bias toward Afghanistan. While we aren't exactly innocent of irritating their country, neither are they. They made a not-so-wise decision to destroy something very dear to America, knowing full well that our military power far exceeds theirs.

You also have to understand that the Afghan people have basically been brought up to hate Americans, and any country that helps us out. The Taliban didn't allow any televisions, radios, or computers while they were in power, just so that people couldn't think for themselves about what was going on in the world outside of Afghanistan.

I do remember once seeing a newscast on CNN about a woman in Afghanistan who was interviewed shortly after 9-11. A reporter asked her if she understood what happened in New York and she didn't know. The reporter informed her that two buildings had been hit and had collapsed. The woman responded, "So? Look at all of these buildings behind me. They have all been destroyed too!" Refering to the bombed buildings of Kandahar.

Both sides are guilty of doing things to destroy the other country. The only justification we have is that ours is during war-time, and their action of flying planes into the WTC was not.[/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]I'd have to disagree with that.

The Afghan people had nothing to do with the WTC attacks -- those who attacked the WTC were arabian (and not Afghani).

Furthermore, the Afghan people are victims of their own regime...which they did not elect. The Afghans are as innocent as the Americans when it comes to being attacked personally.

So I wouldn't say that Afghanistan has any fault at all in what has happened -- the Taliban doesn't respresent Afghanistan...and therefore, the Afghan people have no responsibility for the WTC attacks.

Also, many Afghan people sympathize with the USA...but it's no surprise that the woman said "so?"...I mean, her ENTIRE nation has been destroyed by fighting. I don't think it's arrogant of her to care more about the well-being of her own nation. I mean, I doubt she would be happy about the WTC attacks...but I can understand her saying that Afghanistan is in a much worse state than the USA[/color]

[Lady Macaiodh]

i keep going back & forth on this one.

i understand how a vendor wouldn't want to supprt anyone who is pro-terrorism. it's their decision.

on the other hand, i don't think an entire community should be disrupted by two thick-headed people.

all i know for sure is, i want us to get on w/ our lives. i still get really upset when i think about it, so i try not to. i'm sick of talking about it. i just want to forget all the stuff i saw that day.

[BabyGirl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]

[color=royalblue]Also, many Afghan people sympathize with the USA...but it's no surprise that the woman said "so?"...I mean, her ENTIRE nation has been destroyed by fighting. I don't think it's arrogant of her to care more about the well-being of her own nation. I mean, I doubt she would be happy about the WTC attacks...but I can understand her saying that Afghanistan is in a much worse state than the USA[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=deeppink]That was my point, though I didn't make it clear. I thought [i]she[/i] had a great point...why were we so upset about the WTC when her entire city was being destroyed?[/color]

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by BabyGirl [/i]
[B]

[color=deeppink]That was my point, though I didn't make it clear. I thought [i]she[/i] had a great point...why were we so upset about the WTC when her entire city was being destroyed?[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]Ahh, I read your post as though you were criticizing the Afghan people...sorry about that.

But yeah, it's definitely something to think about. Now Americans know what it's like to suffer from terrorism...and I think that fact may actually help countries who have suffered from it for decades, in the sense that America might be more willing to assist them now.[/color]

[Sui Generis]

I see perfectly where you come form James...and I understand what you are saying... But I mean we are bombing Afghan only...I mean we know there are Taliban supporters all over the world...and yet we bomb an already struggling community and just make it a desolate waste land..I mean sure we plan to help them...but we can't give them back their land...just like they can't give us back the World Trade Center...or the COUNTLESS lives lost in the attacks.... I am too stuck on this issue.....it depends...But I mean these people already have to live in fear...yet we come in bombing mountain in HOPE that there are Taliban people there?! I understand in certain spots it is confirmed that their are Taliban soldiers...I guess I just wish there was a non-violent way to finish this whole damn thing...I don't know about you but I just finished watching "9-11" on CBS...and what the guy said was true to the last second..."It's the gateway to hell"...We had a discussion on this topic not 4 days ago in class....and I asked the simplist question of all...yet the whole world can't answere it....When will this hell end?

[Sephiroth]

That email kinda ticked me off, I mean, I see that as an excuse to look down on arabs, to show them that they?re in ?American? territory and so they can do whatever they want to them if they are on their land, which I see as freakin stupid. So what if those arabs were laughing at the even, America lost two building, do you have any idea how many buildings were lost in arab countries because of American bombings? Those arabs probably saw the loss of the wtc as a ?that?s for what you done to us? kind of thing, which may seem stupid, but that does not mean you have to view them any different, heck, when I told my father about the wtc incident, he just said ??..so? whats two buildings compared to what Americans have done to Iraq?? so you see, many people have different views on the matter?.

[shibatku]

Well your right people have different views. But I look at it this way. Okay so we have bombed them. We did it for a reason, a good reson no just to pay back. So they now have tons of taliban buildng gone. Who really cares about the taliban, they went to far and really the ones to blame are Alqauda, but still we didn't deserve our people dieing did we. I think that if you laugh at the 9/11 incident that, well, are very immature. I'm immature most of the time, but I now when its funny and when its not. I am not the kind to laugh at this kind of thing. I'll laugh things that are close to it, but not ones that actually laugh at the people that died. Okay fine the buildings were destroyed Whoopdedo! who cares (exept the contractors) Its the lose of life that people care about. Think about that.

[D. Dark]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by shibatku [/i]
[B]Well your right people have different views. But I look at it this way. Okay so we have bombed them. We did it for a reason, a good reson no just to pay back. So they now have tons of taliban buildng gone. Who really cares about the taliban, they went to far and really the ones to blame are Alqauda, but still we didn't deserve our people dieing did we. I think that if you laugh at the 9/11 incident that, well, are very immature. I'm immature most of the time, but I now when its funny and when its not. I am not the kind to laugh at this kind of thing. I'll laugh things that are close to it, but not ones that actually laugh at the people that died. Okay fine the buildings were destroyed Whoopdedo! who cares (exept the contractors) Its the lose of life that people care about. Think about that. [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes, but loss of life does not justify the need for more loss of life, and it never will. You can't bomb a whole country, and hit civilians, for revenge. The whole "War against terrorism" is a farce, just an expansion against America's enemies. It wasn't really that clear to me until I found out they were getting ready to attack Iraq...

Has anyone listened to the Milosevic trials, for he may be insolent to the court, but he raises good points. One of the best ones was
"How come we cannot fight terrorists in our own country, while America goes off and fights half way round the globe?".

[Delian]

The bombing of the WTC and the loss of lives was a tragedy...but it is nothing compared to the distruction that America has inflicted on Arab countries in the past years. There are so many people who saw this as payback. I know many people who are from a European not Middle Eastern backgrounds, who saw the WTC attack as revenge.

Anyhow, America has bombed the crap out of Afghanistan and no doubt Osama Bin Laden has perished in those caves, along with his followers. They've killed their target, so why are they targeting Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries now? They weren't involved in the bombings. I'll say the American Govt. is just using their "War on Terror" statement as an excuse to destroy other Middle Eastern countries. They don't want to be considered as barbarians or terrorists themselves so of course they have to have something to hide behind.

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Delian [/i]
[B]

Anyhow, America has bombed the crap out of Afghanistan and no doubt Osama Bin Laden has perished in those caves, along with his followers. They've killed their target, so why are they targeting Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries now? They weren't involved in the bombings. I'll say the American Govt. is just using their "War on Terror" statement as an excuse to destroy other Middle Eastern countries. They don't want to be considered as barbarians or terrorists themselves so of course they have to have something to hide behind. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]I think the fact is, the bombing of innocent civilians is wrong -- if it's on purpose.

In a wartime situation, it is hard to avoid innocent death, but by the same token..I believe that the end can justify the means. If the military tries to avoid casualties of civilians, yet they are either able to liberate a nation (Afghanistan) or oust a violent dictator (Iraq), then it can only be seen as a good thing.

Having said that...with regard to Iraq, I think it is a well-known fact that the Iraqi people are sick and tired of living under UN sanctions. But those sanctions were brought about by Saddam Hussein, because he kicked out weapons inspectors.

Iraq has continually threatened its neighbours (remember, it tried to invade Kuwait in the early 1990's) and thus, I think that removing Saddam's regime would be of huge benefit to Iraq and the middle east as a whole.

The countries surrounding Iraq would feel more at peace and Iraq itself could have sanctions lifted and would once again be able to prosper and become a fully free and democratic nation. I hope that this happens in the future.

Even though I agree with the war on terrorism..and even though I agree with removing Saddam Hussein from power and making sure that countries such as Iran and North Korea are contained and unable to threaten anyone...I am not blind to the fact that the United States often acts for its own interests and is often hypocritical in what it says and what it does.

But in the grand scheme of things, I think it is important not to lose sight of the fact that this war on terrorism could be a huge catalyst. It could allow us to FINALLY get rid of the world's dictatorships...and to finally install democracy around the world.

People will die, certainly. And loss of life is always tragic. But if you aren't targetting civilians deliberately...if you are targetting miltary and Government structures, you are on a higher moral ground than those who bombed the WTC. They deliberately wanted to kill as many innocent people as possible. That isn't payback to the American military or Government...it's just cold-blooded murder.

If they'd wanted to pay back the American Government, they would surely have hit military bases or something like that.

That is why a distinction has to be made about what their true intention was.[/color]

[k9*]

well said James...

America seems to be caught in the middle of foreign policy all the time: we get chastized if we don't help the ones being downtrodden, and we get told to butt out and mind our own business if we do try to help.
*sigh* it's a no-win situation....i wish that war would just vanish from the face of the earth, but hate is too widespread.

[D. Dark]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Delian [/i]
[B]The bombing of the WTC and the loss of lives was a tragedy...but it is nothing compared to the distruction that America has inflicted on Arab countries in the past years. There are so many people who saw this as payback. I know many people who are from a European not Middle Eastern backgrounds, who saw the WTC attack as revenge.

Anyhow, America has bombed the crap out of Afghanistan and no doubt Osama Bin Laden has perished in those caves, along with his followers. They've killed their target, so why are they targeting Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries now? They weren't involved in the bombings. I'll say the American Govt. is just using their "War on Terror" statement as an excuse to destroy other Middle Eastern countries. They don't want to be considered as barbarians or terrorists themselves so of course they have to have something to hide behind. [/B][/QUOTE]

No, it wasn't said to be revenge, but they said that "America deserved it".

Another point is that American policy seems to be one of 1/ Eliminating their enemies, even if it means destroying a whole country for it, 2/ Expansion into the middle east.

Why do America feel they have to act as the world's police? People can take care of their own matters, without help, but doesn't it seem sometimes that there might be ulterior motives?

[Delian]

Although I understand where James is coming from, I do agree that America definitely has alterior motives. I mean, look at the distruction they've caused the Middle East in the past 2 decades. Please... they don't want peace...they want complete control of the Middle East and it's natural resources, one of the main, which happens to be oil. Gosh sometimes it makes me so mad as to how they can show the horror and destruction of 9-11 so that it's constantly in people's minds. They don't want them to forget or get over the shock of the WTC attacks...but they will never show all the gory details of the destruction and horror that they have inflicted on the Middle East, because they will look like terrorists themselves. That's why, although it's sad that people died, I don't care much that two of their precious buildings got blown up.

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Delian [/i]
[B]Although I understand where James is coming from, I do agree that America definitely has alterior motives. I mean, look at the distruction they've caused the Middle East in the past 2 decades. Please... they don't want peace...they want complete control of the Middle East and it's natural resources, one of the main, which happens to be oil. Gosh sometimes it makes me so mad as to how they can show the horror and destruction of 9-11 so that it's constantly in people's minds. They don't want them to forget or get over the shock of the WTC attacks...but they will never show all the gory details of the destruction and horror that they have inflicted on the Middle East, because they will look like terrorists themselves. That's why, although it's sad that people died, I don't care much that two of their precious buildings got blown up. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]America only became involved in Operation Desert Storm to protect its oil interested in the Middle East. I think that is common knowledge; the USA wasn't truly interested in protecting Kuwait from invasion.

Having said that, I am reluctant to sink the boots in straight away.

I think we all have to recognize that dictatorships like Saddam Hussein's need to go. And really, who else is going to do it?

The USA would have to lead such an offensive because the United Kingdom and others are much more consultative in their approach. In some ways, you could say that America doesn't care what people think -- it will do what it wants. That isn't always a good thing, but sometimes it's necessary.

The simple fact is, the USA makes others' business its own, when that business is in its own interest. But the USA can't have a double standard -- if it is to do that, then it must be more responsible for other affairs that it becomes involved in.

Still, the bombing that has gone on in the Middle East is 100% justified. And I think that had it not occurred, we would be even more overrun with terrorism and threats of nuclear war.

So I guess I can see both sides. And perhaps non-Americans are able to see both sides because our education systems (and really our entire media system) is built more around world affairs, while the American education/media systems are built around a very self-centered point of view. That is why sometimes when I hear the rhetoric coming out of America, I think "if only they knew what we know".

Anyway...it's something that could be debated nonstop. But I think we can all agree that removing violent dictatorships (whether done by the USA or someone else) is going to be necessary if we [i]ever[/i] want to come close to something like world peace.[/color]

[Sui Generis]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]

[color=royalblue]I think the fact is, the bombing of innocent civilians is wrong -- if it's on purpose.

In a wartime situation, it is hard to avoid innocent death, but by the same token..I believe that the end can justify the means. If the military tries to avoid casualties of civilians, yet they are either able to liberate a nation (Afghanistan) or oust a violent dictator (Iraq), then it can only be seen as a good thing.

Having said that...with regard to Iraq, I think it is a well-known fact that the Iraqi people are sick and tired of living under UN sanctions. But those sanctions were brought about by Saddam Hussein, because he kicked out weapons inspectors.

Iraq has continually threatened its neighbours (remember, it tried to invade Kuwait in the early 1990's) and thus, I think that removing Saddam's regime would be of huge benefit to Iraq and the middle east as a whole.

The countries surrounding Iraq would feel more at peace and Iraq itself could have sanctions lifted and would once again be able to prosper and become a fully free and democratic nation. I hope that this happens in the future.

Even though I agree with the war on terrorism..and even though I agree with removing Saddam Hussein from power and making sure that countries such as Iran and North Korea are contained and unable to threaten anyone...I am not blind to the fact that the United States often acts for its own interests and is often hypocritical in what it says and what it does.

But in the grand scheme of things, I think it is important not to lose sight of the fact that this war on terrorism could be a huge catalyst. It could allow us to FINALLY get rid of the world's dictatorships...and to finally install democracy around the world.

People will die, certainly. And loss of life is always tragic. But if you aren't targetting civilians deliberately...if you are targetting miltary and Government structures, you are on a higher moral ground than those who bombed the WTC. They deliberately wanted to kill as many innocent people as possible. That isn't payback to the American military or Government...it's just cold-blooded murder.

If they'd wanted to pay back the American Government, they would surely have hit military bases or something like that.

That is why a distinction has to be made about what their true intention was.[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

They did hit something pretty close to a military base...the Pentagon...thats where everything Military comes and goes...So yes they got back at our government,economy, military, and the innocent. Thank god they didn't hit the white house. But personally I thought if they wanted to do severe damage why not take out Lady Glory? Heh..Its good that they didn't!

But yes I agree with James on this....although I was on the opposing side in this argument...I think James has made several worthy comments and I agree with them.

If we do take out the World's Dictatorship this world will probably not be considered active in war....we might get a few dormat years!

They only thing I am afraid of on this whole war issue is, what if the Middle East bans together...then we have World War3 and god knows the weapons we have now, we will literally annilate eachother and every living thing!!

"I do not know what we will fight with in WW3, but I do know that we will fight with sticks and stones in WW4..." The smartest man alive....Albert Einstein

[k9*]

actually, there is one reason to avoid going after lady liberty, it would anger more than just america, seeing has how it is one of only two major monuments by monsieur (sorry about sp) eiffel.

i just wish petty revenge was the goal...we don't want to bring osama to justice, we want to punish him

[Sui Generis]

Yes but think of what she represents...She represents America...Everything about America...taking down liberty would be like taking down America...yes it would anger other coutnries...but I don't think they really thought they could beat the US...the have fought valiantly but the numbers don't add up...we are too numurouse..

[James]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by DuoGod of Death [/i]
[B]Yes but think of what she represents...She represents America...Everything about America...taking down liberty would be like taking down America...yes it would anger other coutnries...but I don't think they really thought they could beat the US...the have fought valiantly but the numbers don't add up...we are too numurouse.. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=royalblue]I think most would agree that taking down the Statue of Liberty is preferable to taking down the World Trade Towers.

I mean, sure, it's an important monument...but which act will kill more people? The WTC act, of course. Therefore, it's always best to have minimal casualties.

Of course...the terrorists wanted [i]maximum[/i] casualties...[/color]

[D. Dark]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B]

[color=royalblue]I think most would agree that taking down the Statue of Liberty is preferable to taking down the World Trade Towers.

I mean, sure, it's an important monument...but which act will kill more people? The WTC act, of course. Therefore, it's always best to have minimal casualties.

Of course...the terrorists wanted [i]maximum[/i] casualties...[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes, here I completely agree. They were after maximum casulties. That would shock America greatly, but a attack on the Statue of Liberty would have a more devestating impact, I think...

An incredible blow to morale that might have sunk America's spirit...

But we have to argue from both sides (Going back a bit). Without America to help out (In whatever ways it deems...reasonable), there would have many, many major wars...