An alternate take on the attacks

Great Debates
1

If you’ve known me for any length of time, you know that I espouse some of the most non-mainstream, non-conventonal wisdom opinions imaginable. Heck, being a fan of Dan Perkins (http://www.thismodernworld.com) is more than enough evidence. As such, I’d like to offer my take on the recent attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. I know I’m setting myself up for nuclear-level flaming here, but I think this is something that has to be said.

All right, now…

The thing that struck me about the attacks was the choice of targets. The World Trade Center, a hub of business for many years, and the Pentagon, responsible for procuring weapons for the military. Which, when you think about it, makes them probably the most likely targets for attack in the entire nation.

That the American military would be hated enough for some people to go to extreme lengths to harm it is no surprise. There have been numerous well-documented attacks over the past century, including the recent suicide bombing of the USS Cole.

But business? Well, guess what, many fairly elected and often very popular leaders have been overthrown through efforts of the American government because they stood in the way of our business interests. I’ll bring up a recent example: In the early 80’s, the people of Iran elected governor Mossadegh in a free election. By all accounts, he was well-received and very popular. But he sought to nationalize the nation’s oil production, cutting American (and British) oil companies out completely. The CIA, in one of their covert operations (because something that despicable would never be accepted in the light of day), overthrew him, placing the Shah back into power. Who proceded to institute a secret service of its own which would commit some of the vilest atrocities against the people of Iran that anyone’s ever seen. (And then, of course, there was fun with Ruhollah Khomeini.) The hostage kidnappings in the 80’s were a direct result of the anger and outrage of a nation ruined by capitalistic interests. Similar incidents have occurred in Chile, Guatemala, and Nicaragua (remember the Contra-revolutionaries and a litttle scandal attached to them?). Given that our system of capitalism has caused so much horror, is it really surprising that someone, someday, would attack its most prominent symbol?

I’m not in any way rationalizing the attack, nor am I ridiculing or marginalizing the very real plight of the victims. But it’s extremely important to understand that capitalism is not universally loved all around the world, and there are very legitimate reasons for that.

In a sense, this is like Pearl Harbor. The attack was extremely brazen, but it really shouldn’t be a surprise. I only hope that this prompts a serious reassessment of the way we’ve forced our capitalisitc designs on the world, because now we have indisputable proof that the world, if desperate enough, can retaliate.

In the meantime, I suggest we all stay calm and wait until we get more facts before passing judgment on anyone.

Footnote: When I suggested on a previous Great Debates thread that Slobodan Milosevic be executed, the consensus I got was that the UN should uphold the law and give him a fair trial, then imprison him. I’d appreciate it if any respondents to this thread be as calm and measured in their responses

2

I like your thinking, but if the general consensus is correct and the person behind this bin Laden, I don’t think this was about an attack on capitalism.

3

I agree with what vorfod said. You’ve got a point, but its validity depends on who orchestrated the attacks.

4

All of this speculation is going to sound really bizarre, in retrospect, if we discover that the attacks were perpetrated by Timothy McVeigh. (Especially 'cause he’s been dead for several months.)

5

I think the thing to remember in the context of your views is that it’s not necessarily that Capitalism is so unloved by others, it’s that Capitalism is perceived to be so loved by Americans. You hit your enemy where it hurts them and the WTC were symbols of Capitalism and also at the heart of Wall Street.

The Pentagon is the prime symbol of military might.

No one knows where the 4th (Pen) plane was heading but none of the first three targets included symbols of democracy – I’ve seen no evidence yet to say the Pentagon plane couldn’t have hit the White House or Capitol building.

6

I heard the fourth plane was heading towards Camp David, but the pilot put it into an irreversible nosedive before the terrorists could kill him and take control of the plane.

What gets me, though, is how any of this was even possible considering that the only weapons they had were knives and cardboard cutters.

7

Huh?

This is an overtly political act and is intended to make a political statement. I known that politics and economic issues are often intertwined but I don’t think your hypothesis is germane regarding the main intent of the attack.

Where, in what place in the world today, is American capitalism actively reviled by a substantial portion of the population. Even the Chinese are treading the capitalist road now.

If anything American capitalism is what much of the world admires (and envies). Granted, there are radical, green related and quasi-anarchic etc groups that blame capitalism and its related components for all manner of ills, however, these groups are primarly (though not all) western and home grown in origin.

8

Knives’ll still kill ya dude.

9

Just a WAG, but if someone grabbed a stewardess and claimed he’d kill her (with said puny razor-blade knife) if the passengers didn’t do what he said, and the passengers had no reason to believe that the hijacker’s end goal was to crash the plane, then I think most people would tend to sit down and wait to see how things played out rather than risk the stewardess’s life by trying to overpower the guy with the knife.

10

Ah, I get it. The terrorists bomb America because they hate capitalism. So our rational response should be…junk capitalism! Uh huh. Maybe on your planet you always do what the terrorists demand. On MY planet you don’t reward terrorist activity for a very simple reason. If terrorist activity is rewarded then it tends to be repeated. No. If they hate capitalism the correct choice of actions is MORE capitalism.

And this?

This is just pathetic. Maybe you should just keep your opinions to yourself for the next couple of weeks.

11

One of my friends had an interesting point today. If terrorists wanted to show that they hate all things American, then why didn’t they blow up the Statue of Liberty? It is, after all, the symbol of all of the things that Americans say that they stand for - freedom, the chance to make a new life for yourself, etc. I mean, the statue is only a big piece of copper, but imagine what a powerful message it would be if it were struck down. Try to imagine the world without it, and you’ll find that it is near impossible to fathom.

12

If you want to do maximum damage take out wall street. If you haven’t noticed yet, all stock markets that are open are down 5-10%. The US will probably open down significantly but with a few days for cooler heads to prevail, maybe it won’t drop so dramatically.

World Trade Center was a pretty serious center for Lehmans, Merrills, Morgan Stanley and Solomons. although I’ve been reading how it looks like staff got out in time. Trading systems will have backups. It may not be that bad. After the Chicago flood, Swiss Bank Corp were on their feet extremely quickly although of course not at normal operating levels, certainly enough to protect their and their customer risk.

This was a high profile target, killed an awful lot of people, struck in the heart of America and is going to do serious one-off damage on the global financial markets

13

I am thrilled by the responses I have read so-far. The people of GD certainly appear to me as kindred spirits in their opennes to ideas, their courtesy to others, and their passion toward collaboration to work toward an understanding of complex issues.

DKW,
I disagree with the thoery that the attack on the WTC was an attack on Capitalism. I believe that this was an act of war toward a hated enemy by a fanatic terrorist who utilizes hatred against U.S. Americans as a means of drawing fellow terrorists to their cause. As you point out, there are many, many valid reasons for people in many parts of the world to hate the U.S. We have decimated governments and cultures around the world through covert actions, as well as through the widespread distribution of arms. I believe that the attack was a retaliation against these policies.

Capitalism dos not automatically denote intervention in the political affairs of countries. In any system of government or business, ethics and morality, not theory, regulate the ultimate actions of the participants. Ruthless greed on the part of business and government leaders has caused tremendous damange to societies worldwide. But the thoery of Capitalism, itself, has nothing to do with the acts of such people. Like Bin Laden, such individuals are motivated by narcissistic greed.

That said, I am horrified by the recent attacks. Violence against innocent people is revolting. Such violence is normally rationalized as being “acceptable” only in specialized situations during war. I believe that the recent attacks are the most recent act of war by Bin Laden against the U.S. people.

14

Perhaps it’s common knowledge, and I just lack education, but I’ve never heard about this before. Can you provide a cite?

15

That’s early '50s, not early '80s

16

Here’s a perfectly good reason why they targeted the WTC–they were finishing the job they started a couple of years ago when they bombed it the first time. This time they made sure they got it.