Those people rejoicing and dancing in the streets are living a life that we have no concept of. It turns my stomach but I totally expected it. They have different values over there. They hate us…they teach their children and wives to hate us. All of this is unbelievable!
Yeah, you’re right. We must stop any more killing at all.
What are you, a child!?
“Isn’t it enough already?”
What the hell are you talking about? What should we do, have a sing-a-long? Maybe a protest?
The people and/or nations responsible for this are like a razor blade in an apple. You remove them. Plain and simple. And you remove them in a way that may give future terrorists pause before they act again. We don’t stoop to the level of those sub-human fucks and murder innocent people, but you damn well better believe the blood’s gonna flow, and flow hard.
BTW, I do agree with you about world religions. All I can say is thank god Pat Robertson’s not in the White House or there’d be mushroom clouds all over the world right now.
[Moderator Hat: ON]
Demise said:
OK, folks – this is an emotional time, obviously. But that is no reason to take it out on one another by violating the rules here. Cool it. Now.
David B, SDMB Great Debates Moderator
[Moderator Hat: OFF]
What a pathetic, stupid thing to say. I agree with hapaXL; this is the most remarkably offensive statement I’ve seen today, including Wild Bill’s asinine 'nuke ‘em all’ thread. (Yeah, go ahead and say “fuck you” to me, too. In GD.)
Do me a favor, pal; don’t side with me in any more arguments.
Oh, brother – I can find hundreds of nutballs in the United States who’d be whoopin’ it up and partyin’ if CNN reported the death of Khomenhi or Hussein. Or are you saying it’s acceptable because those are our nutballs?
Just because some Palestinians have no taste doesn’t mean they’re all evil or something. It’s just a different style of nutball-ness. Right now, I’m more worried about the folks writing in these message boards demanding an immediate retaliatory attack (against who?) than I am about any dancing Palestinians.
[Moderator Hat: ON]
And that goes for you, too, Lucifer. I don’t want to see any more statements like:
Discuss this like adults, without insults, or I’ll start deleting messages.
David B, SDMB Great Debates Moderator
[Moderator Hat: OFF]
tracer:
There is also some comparison in regards the stunning magnitude and loss of life.
And here any resemblace to Pearl Harbor ends.
Let’s please stop comparing this attack to Pearl Harbor; in that case, the Japanese military attacked American military, with military weapons. They didn’t hijack civillian commercial craft full of civillian non-combatants to do their deed.
The Japanese acted honorably and within the rules of war compared to the terrorist bastards who pulled this off.
Generally:
Let us, as a nation and a world, first take pause to bury and mourn our fellow citizens who have perished on this second Day of Infamy.
Then let us devote the full measure of our resources to identifying the guilty parties, and let our measured response be proportionate to not only the original act, but tempered with mercy for those not party to this incident, who have no cause against us or our way of life.
A disproportionate response, inflicting grievous injury and death upon peoples who are just as horrified as we are, will only perpetuate this cycle of violence.
We have the capability to identify, locate and exterminate with precision and extreme prejudice the guilty parties; let’s not add needlessly to the loss of life. It will not return our dead to life, or vindicate us in their eyes.
As far as “people dancing in the streets” in the Middle East, let them; and let us take note, as well. It speaks to their character, as a people and a nation, and we would be well advised to moderate our future contact with such peoples and nations to reflect that.
The candied words and greasy platitudes of their leaders should be met with skepticism and reserve. When their actions are in accord with their words, then we will know that they are truly what they appear to be: our friends.
Until then: fuck 'em!
I can think of several ways in which bin Laden, should it come to light that he is responsible, would be nabbed. Mainly though, with as many Mid-East groups, be they terrorists, politically minded, or just cranky, so quick in denying responsibility and even condemning the attack, I can see someone who knows where he is slipping info to the CIA/FBI/whatever. Why? The heat will be on, heavy. Any operations you have, whether anti-western attacks, pamphlet-passing, or even charity operations, you are going to looked on with suspicion. He makes it hard for you to do your thing. And, if you are another terrorist group, let him be caught and you have a martyr-to-be. Maybe you can take his place in the pantheon of International Threats. And with as many people who must be involved in such an attack, someone is bound to be caught. Unfortunately, it won’t be soon enough.
Sorry, DavidB.
I wish I’d said something like ExTank just said. ('Tank, posts like that are why I stay on this board. Thank you.)
[hijack]
Among other things, I have to wonder what it’s like on the Left Behind message boards right now…
[/hijack]
Hussein and Khomenhi are not at all comparable to the (probably) thousands of innocent people slaughtered in cold blood this morning. Rejoicing at the death of someone who is themself a murderer is a far cry from rejoicing at the murder of thousands of innocents.
rjung…I don’t know what you’re talking about. All I said was that they have different “truths” than we do. I never said that their celebrating was acceptable in the least OR that they are “all evil.” Read it again.
Hear,hear Ex tank!
This calls for reasoned, purposeful action, not more bloody mindedness. We are supposed to be a civilized nation, lashing out blindly would put us on the same level as those who did this. I know the warmongers will sneer at this attitude, but there must be no more deaths than neccessary. Punish those responsible. I bet anything that there have to be more people involved in this than the handful that hijacked the planes. The hijackers were most likely the sucidal tools of a more sophisticated leader. Find him. Cut his balls off and feed him to the dogs.
That’s loser talk. We need to bomb those who claim to have done it. All of 'em.
Reallylame:
I am sure the terrorists have that same rationalization about their actions toward the united states. If you think that being diplomatically “at war” with someone is the only way to justify killing thousands of civilians, then you aren’t really looking at the big picture of how things work. Modern countries very seldom fight each other directly anymore. It is much easier to conscript a few trained mercenary terrorists to weaken your enemy (or send them a message) than it is to officially declare war—especially if your enemy is the United States and you have no chance in traditional combat. Nationalism may be the way we ideally wage a noble battle, but not everyone is a nationalist. The United States has many organizations and individuals that are considered hostile enemies.
Remember back in the good ‘ol days when each country would present an army on the battlefield and then march directly at each other in a straight line as they fire their muskets? Well why did that ever change? Because, the sides that have no chance fighting that way figured out that it works better when you hide behind a tree or a rock instead of out in the open. Hell, the British may have called the Minute Men barbarians for their lack of noble fighting style, but in the end the old style gave way to guerrilla tactics and less direct combat.
Today we have our own idea of noble warfare and I imagine that it too is obsolete. The idea of an “enemy” is much more ambiguous it seems.
Acco40:
Perhaps that’s easy for you to say. You have my permission to go to the nearest recruiting station and pledge your name and life to your advocated course of action; to climb into the cockpits and bombing stations of our warplanes and “bring her straight and level” long enough to drop your payload; to climb into a tank and drive upon “the enemy”; to pick up a rifle and advance into the guns of your proposed targets.
Then come back and we’ll talk on a more equitable basis about the blood on our collective hands. I did my time, and have seen the elephant. Have you?
From Collounsbury:
The original text can be found over in this thread: Message from Collounsbury.
For those unfamiliar with this poster, Collounsbury is an American abroad, working and living in the Middle East (Egypt, IIRC). He is a voice of reason and understanding in reconciling the differences between Islamic/Middle Eastern points-of-view with our Western ones. He is uniquely qualified to do so by dint of education and first-hand experience.
(Lucifer’s glowing eyes dim)
Sorry-apologies to all, esp. gatopescado. Didn’t mean to get personal.
Certainly a plea for a stop to the violence should be respected. Angry as I am right now, I don’t want to see some kind of retribution that involves terror attacks on civilians.
Still, I stick with what I said. This isn’t a problem for diplomacy or embargos, but an entirely appropriate military response. And it will probably be a messy one.
I don’t buy the ‘eye for an eye’ response, but clearly there must be an example made here.
Steve Wright, Semp, ExTank - - Well put. Thanks for the good words.
What to do? No clue. How the heck does one defend against terrorism without becoming a totalitarian (no freedom) state or an agressor that wipes out entire suspect nations, innocents and all. Obviously, those are extremes. Perhaps we are stuck with some level of terrorism but this case absolutely requires some kind of action. I hope Bush has some great advisors. Glad to see that the world’s leaders are denouncing this act. The Palistinians dancing in the street chanting ‘God is great’ is sad & enraging.
Maybe fighting ignorance will save the world.
News Flash: The U.S. government is now saying that they have new and specific information indicating that Osama Bin Laden is involved.
If that is the case, the Taliban government in Afghanistan is finished. It’s the closest thing to a terrorist organization actually in power, and it has been actively supporting and harboring Bin Laden.
Kabong:
What is the “probably using conventional weapons” supposed to mean? If you see anything else in that crystal ball of yours, throw it far, far away.
Izzy:
What makes you think that? Vietnam was a disaster because they had the support of the Soviet Unioin and China. Afghanistan was a disaster for the Soviet Union, because Afghanistan had the support of the US. It was payback time, it was paid back with gusto and maybe a bit naivete. Many people were highly surprised to see our Afghani “buddies” turn their guns (and our Stingers) at us after they had kicked the Soviets out. Today’s Afghanistan is a different place. It has no friends (or none who admit it.) There is no danger to trigger WWIII, which was a big factor during Vietnam and to some extent during the Soviet/Afghani conflict. Nah, it wouldn’t be a Vietnam. Done wrong, it could be a Somalia though.
Lemur:
How naïve can you be? A terrorist organization of any size needs the support of a country. Using a terrorist organization instead of your army puts a thin layer of deniability between the government and the operatives. But the layer can be removed.
Donovan:
True. Very true. But the list of suspects isn’t long. This wasn’t a bunch of crackpots mixing fertlizer. These were suicide bombers trained in flying a modern airplane, who had to hijack planes in a highly coordinated manner. I bet you there already is more than a ghost of an idea.
Everybody: Kissinger put it most succinctly when he said today: “It’s not the people who have done it. It’s the people who make it happen.”
And in case anybody thinks that this isn’t war: The military is on a war footing. The leadership is dispersed in secure locations. Two carrier task forces are en route to NYC to protect the city. Borders are closed. Air traffic is shut down. This is unprecedented.