Again I did not say Bush held up anything. But he certainly gobbled 911 '-911 . He must have said 9 slash 11. Do you believe anybody does not know 911 .(not 9/11) was the date of the attack.
A building could be up by now . Invent, and you will, your own conspiracy theories.
I still think if we had kept the force in Afghanistan ,we would have cleaned out the Taliban as a force. It has been well documented that we had the majority of the world in back of us. I have not checked Borneo or Madigascar. So I would never believe all were back of us.
Of course I never said every country was behind us. You said it and won another debate with yourself. Congrats
Well, maybe I’m missing the point then. Who exactly DID hold things up then? Could you explain what point you were trying to make about clearing the debris and redesigning/rebuilding the tower(s)…perhaps in whole sentences? Maybe a paragraph or two?
He ‘gobbled’ it? What does this mean exactly? That he talked about it? Used it politically? Physically ate 911…maybe in the form of a cake or something? Could you, perhaps, take the time to go into a bit more detail about what the hell you are talking about?
Well, I have to admit, outside a few folks roaming around the steppes in Outer Mongolia…I didn’t think so. Before…
Well, I’m sure they could have erected a shed or maybe a trailer on the site, sure. But a modern skyscraper? What do you base this on? Even without having to clear out all the rubble AND repair the bath tub, it takes years to not only design and get approval for such a structure (going to be the worlds tallest building when completed), but to actually build the thing.
Again, who exactly do you think is holding things up, if not Bush? WHY is it being held up (since you obviously think it is)? To what end? For what purpose?
Rubber duck duplex for brain fart sump pump. Or something.
Well, thats fine. You can think that all you want. Personally I think that if only people would eat more beans we wouldn’t be so dependent on foreign oil. 
Then it shouldn’t be hard for you to produce that documentation to prove your case. I suppose you are talking about the majority of the worlds GOVERNMENTS of course…not necessarily the worlds PEOPLE.
Maybe you should check Syria and Palestine.
Maybe they were all in the back of the BUS? Is that what you mean?
Why thank you! I feel quite good about it myself as well. It was much harder to win against myself than against some others…so I’m happy for the victory.
-XT
This is the best response thus far to the question “how did 9/11 change the world?”
9/11 happened and the President addressed the nation. But what happened between then? There was talk and action.
That day was the first day I ever posted on any message board. It was before I discovered the SDMB. I remember how ABC news encouraged Americans to visit the message boards, for consolence, information, and support. I did not live in New York so I can’t speak for or against the message boards from that perspective. I do remember the weeks after 9/11, it felt like entering the fray. The messages and threads were very disorganized.
‘I hope who did these attacks pays!’, ‘I hate those foreigners!’, ect. ect. (posted by millions - not constructive)
What we needed was…
‘Major League baseball postpones season indefinitely!!! — Call for Americans to organize field vigils in their cities’, ‘Teachers are probably going to discuss attacks in civic ed classes tomorrow – what should we discuss?’, ect. ect. (posted by thousands, responded by millions - constructive)
The problem was that in 2001 there was no MySpace, YouTube, and Digg. The people have the power!!! MySpacers, YouTubers, Diggers, and, yes, Dopers could have directly or indirectly influenced George W. Bush and therefore foreign policy. And even if we couldn’t influence Bush, then we could still influence foreign policy. As Americans, as citizens of the world we must stop huddling around the “camp fire”, the “water cooler” shooting the breeze, talking shit about nothing. I get it! You get it! Everyone gets it!
I remember my biology professor giving a speech about how we can’t dwell on this day. I can’t recall anything from his speech but I remember the sentiment and his point. We can’t stand on the street corner and JUST say “I remember five years ago when it happened…the smoke and the fire… I felt like there was no control…and that plane” "Yeah, it was eerie seeing the plane going into the World Trade Center… STOP!!!..
…or better yet CONTINUE, GO ON FROM THERE. What can you say today that you can continue tomorrow?
Oh. I thought the idea behind the Freedom Tower was that it was going to be the tallest building in the world when completed (thought I saw this somewhere…Discovery Channel or some such).
C’est la vie…not like this will be the first time I’ve been wrong. 
Well, thats not unusual…
-XT
Perhaps what you remember is that the Freedom Tower will be 1776 feet tall, including towers. (Cite.)
If you remember, after 9/11 people said that irony was dead, that everything changed. Now it is a plot device.
Pearl Harbor demonstrated for sure that the Japanese were our enemies. 9/11 demonstrated that the terrorist are our enemies. Did things change? Sure. But that’s not unique.
As for world support, do you deny that the average level of support for us for invading Afghanistan was much higher than for our invasion of Iraq? Got a cite? Indeed there were pacifists and real US haters who demonstrated, but they were a tiny minority.
Oh, the delay in building a new tower is hardly surprising in NY - there are buildings that have taken a lot longer. To some extent it was trying to do a good job on a sensitive site, but it was hardly an effect of 9/11.
And today’s date is 625?
Unless you’re just messing with us, the slash is preferred over a dash, and is always written, but never spoken, so he would not have said “nine slash eleven.”
I have seen 911 referring to that specific day many many times. I have not often seen it with a slash.
You do realize that you have just gutted your own argument, right?
911 Pictures is the name of a company that specializes in collecting and distributing photographs of responses to emergency calls (phone number 911) and has nothing to do with any dates in September. In fact, a casual survey of that site does not even turn up any photographs of the September, 2001 attack on the U.S. (although there may be some photos buried on some back pages) and every reverence to “911” on the home page explicitly says “911 Pictures.”
It is possible to find web sites named “911” in reference to the WTC and Pentagon attacks, but that is because a slash is a specific character in a web address and it would not be possible to have a site named 9/11.com as it would fail the syntax checks of internet processing.
I think that our nation’s leadership did take the wrong attitude. and has consistently conveyed the wrong attitude, in response to the attacks of 9/11/01. The wrong attitude has been an uncontainable outrage; “How DARE they!? Have they any idea who in the hell they are FUCKING WITH?!”
But that didn’t seem to be the attitude in the beginning. My memory (such as it is) is that President Bush’s attitude was, “Well, folks, we’re in the soup now. We have to go get the bad guys or they’ll do it again.” It was later, as things started going wrong in Iraq that the uncontained outrage over 9/11 manifested itself, as if Bush was thinking that if he got really, really pissed, he’d get more support for his war in Iraq. I did think we Americans were a little overwrought about the losses we suffered on that day, considering the genocide and ethnic cleansing that was going on in other parts of the world. I don’t mean that those who lost loved ones shouldn’t be devastated by their losses – their lives will never be the same. But as a nation, I’d rather we had been a bit more stoic.
I actually was surprised that there was so much onctroversy over whether to rebuild the WTC – we Americans have always rebuilt after a disaster. It’s what we do. I don’t remember what the reasoning of the anti-rebuilding contingent was – possibly cost, which probably would have been prohibitive. But then there was Hurricane Katrina, and another controversy about rebuilding, and I was forced to stop and think – maybe a catastrophe is a good time to think hard about rebuilding. Maybe it’s time for another trait to manifest itself – hard-nosed pragmatism.
No. For me, the “change” was that I now have two fewer living friends than I had on 9/10/01. And probably 100,000 other people lost family member and friends that day, as a direct result of the terrorists’ actions.
And panache45 amply demonstrates the point I was making earlier. Despite the way things seem nowadays, the government, to a good extent, does still operate by the will of the people. And expecting panache and others like him to treat the deaths of loved ones killed in 9/11 as if it were a traffic accident, mourn, shrug, and move on, is unreasonable.
Nobody treated 911 like a traffic accident. It was not the end of the world for us though. How many have died as a result of it. Men women and children on the other side of the earth ,with no responsibility for it died.
I think if we rebuilt quickly the impact worldwide would have been lessened. Years of plotting and planning to pull it off would have been wasted. The next recruits to give up their lives to attack us would have known that even after a huge successful attack ,America went back to being America. Too big and strong to over react. Try convincing a terrorist that giving up his life to strike America is worth it when we just went on with life. After all disruption of life is what they were after. We gave it to them.
One million children will die of malaria this year, according to this month’s National Geographic.
Us? No. For the individuals, it was pretty close. And when you have tens of thousands, if not more, individuals hurt in this same way, as I said, expecting them to sit down and shut up for the good of the rest of the world is unreasonable.
Yes, yes, very tragic. We’ve had threads about this before. If you want to condemn those affected by 9/11 for being overwrought, irrational, or dragging the world down by indirectly causing the Iraq War, be my guest. See how far that kind of moral superiority gets you.
While I don’t entirely agree with the OP, his point about other countries experiencing terrorist attacks is valid. How do you think the world would have responded if our British friends had reacted to the Irish terror attacks by invading Norway?
I agree with you Mosier,iF someone I loved died in an R.T.A. I would feel sad but accept it as a part of life ,but if they were deliberately killed by some sick fuckers who are metephorically living on a different planet and there actually was no sane reason to do so,then I would feel a little bit more then sad.
By that logic the USSR was never really a threat.
9/11 was an historic turning point in American history. On 9/10/01, terrorism was an overseas issue that was handled via law enforcement efforts. It was clear where they were based and who was supporting them, but the embassy bombings, the Cole attack, etc., were not viewed as sufficient justification for unsheathing the sword to go after them.
On 9/11/01, our largest city and our capitol were attacked by islamic extremists. Our economy was disrupted and over three thousand innocent people died. This event provided the justification for military action and woke up many more people to the issue of islamic terrorism.
It also changed the political landscape. Only a committed leftward idealogue will deny that folks on the left have significant political baggage for being soft on national defense. 9/11 moved them to the political kids table for a while. The CIA and NSA were beefed up. Military spending rose. All things that folks on the left generally oppose.
Now, six years later, the effects of 9/11 on the political landscape continue. Folks on the left hate it when the event is involked because it reminds people that the problem of islamic terror will not be solved by political correctness and “dialogue”. So recent terror events are either downplayed or blamed on the presence of the United States in Iraq, rather that radical Imams grooming new jihadists in the mosques all over the world.
The reaction to 9/11 has cooled, bringing the political tug of war back to a fairly even footing. People are back to yelling about the CIA again…“secret prisons! torture!”. And the NSA surveillance issue. We’ll never know the specifics of what the CIA and the NSA have done, so we can’t know when they’ve crossed the line. But 9/11 taught us that their efforts are necessary whether we find them ideologically palatable or not. So the debate continues…right up until the next 9/11 scale attack. At that point, the politics of the left will take another hit and the american public will once again get serious about islamic extremism.
Well, I am not of the left, but I hate it because that event was used as an excuse for the neo-cons to drag us into a war they had already desired that we should have never begun which had nothing to do with fighting Islamist terrorists (other than the fact that we have turned Iraq into one of the best recruiting posters that bin Laden could have desired. I hate it because it has been used to rationalize the use of torture (which has never been demonstrated to be an effective tool to collect information), rationalize the suspension of liberties, and rationalize illegal actions by the government to spy on its own people.
There are many ways that one may mourn the victims of the WTC/Pentagon attacks while still deploring the ways that waving its bloody banner has been used to corrupt the government.