# We don't need to 'understand the issues that led' to Tuesday's atrocities
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167
**Category:** The BBQ Pit
**Created:** [September 17, 2001, 3:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167 "2001-09-17T15:20:22Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 6
### Author:  [@Tamerlane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tamerlane)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/101 "2001-09-18T00:51:09Z")
**Jodi** : Well, we’re not so far appart then. I agree inaction or simple sanctions are not viable options, at least not from my standpoint. Terrorists, not being governments, _thrive_ on sanctions - From their standpoint it just helps ratchet up the misery index and makes recruitment that much easier.
And I am resigned to the sad fact that collateral damage may be impossible to prevent. It is a fact of war, though I think care should be taken to avoid the death of civilians, when possible ( My main beef with a few people in recent days have been with those that feel that civilians in Afghanistan and elsewhere were complicit in some way in these terrorist acts and therefore deserve punishment as an act of retribution or to “set an example” ).
I guess then, where I might have an academic disagreement with you or **Fenris** ( who I greatly admire for his wit and superb taste in literature 🙂 ), is that I think discussions of causation are appropriate at this time. I think such conversations can be held without falling into a “blame the victims” mentality and can be helpful in coming to grips with what it may require to reduce terrorism ( either in a general sense or in this particular circumstance ) in the future.
I do respect the “It’s Too Soon” argument, but I respectfully disagree with it. But then I have been accused of being too phlegmatic about a lot of things in the past, so this might just be a personality difference ( and not necessarily a positive or negative one ).
At any rate I’ve said my piece and I have to go shower and forage, so a good day to you all 🙂 .
- Tamerlane
---
### Author:  [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/102 "2001-09-18T00:55:49Z")
GUIN, your post brought tears to my eyes, and not in a good way. To hear you say that the United States was not an innocent victim – now _I’m_ nauseous.
This was not an attack on a military installation. It was not an attack that was in any way provoked by any specific, recent action. It was not an attack that was proportional as a response to any perceived wrong.
Jesus Christ. It’s been less than a week. 5000 dead, and hundreds wandering Manhattan looking for their lost loved ones, hoping against hope that someone is alive in a pit of hell six stories deep and sixteen acres across.
> [@](#):
>
> No man is an island." Likewise, No nation can exist in a vacume. Isolationism and nationalism at the expense of others is stupid and dangerous and self-destructive. Why are we so opposed to working with other nations?
I never said we should exist in a vacuum. I never said we should exalt nationalist or practice isolationsim. In times as emotional as this, I’ll be DAMNED if I’ll allow my position to be twisted.
> [@](#):
>
> Jodi, part of the reason I am majoring in history is that I find it an excellent way to learn how to change things-how to find solutions to problems.
Gosh, GUIN, it almost makes me wish I majored in history as well! Oh, wait. I did. And I make you the same invitation I have extended to others: If you have some “solution” to this current problem, then by all means let’s hear it.
> [@](#):
>
> Why must we change many of the things we do? Because a lot of what we have done is just plain wrong.
I have never said we should not change. I have said we should not change as a response to terrorism, if the change constitutes what the terrorists want. Why not? Because we should not give in to terrorism.
> [@](#):
>
> Loving this country does not mean one must be blind to its faults.
Perhaps a point better made in a thread where at least one poster has advocated being blind to its faults?
---
### Author:  [@Sterra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sterra)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/103 "2001-09-18T00:57:34Z")
**Jodi**
> [@](#):
>
> Because unless I am willing to change my behavior to prevent them from being “set off” again – which I am not – then it doesn’t matter why they did it. I don’t care what “set them off.” At all. I realize that you do not understand why I do not care, but I trust you at least grasp that I really, really don’t care, because I really, really don’t see of what practical use knowing is. And, with all respect, neither you nor anyone else has given me any persuasive reason why I need to understand their motivations at this time, before a response is undertaken. As I have already said, the enormity of the crime IMO dictates the harshest response commensurate with justice, regardless of motivation.
What if their motivation is to lead the USA to fight on their terrain where they think they can win and unite the arab nations against America? Afghanistan is barely a country and the Taliban are mostly disliked. If they can hide from or stop the attacks by America then they stand to gain in reputation by being a nation under attack. After all they can always deny the terrorist attack.
---
### Author:  [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/104 "2001-09-18T01:12:25Z")
MATT –
> [@](#):
>
> I have no other way to characterize an intentional refusal to understand as much of the attack as one can; to analyze the politics and dynamics of the region, country/ies, people, religion, and situation we’re about to bomb or invade.
Wait a minute. Believing that we need not know every iota of detail about the motivations of the hijackers means I advocate “blindly striking out” against an entire region? There is then, in your lexicon, no space between comprensive knowledge of one subject and “blindness” of another? I am at a loss to know how to respond to this. You grossly mischaracterize my position, and then you excuse it because “you have no other way to characterize it” except as something it patently is not. This total failure of comprehension strikes me as unfortunate, but it also strikes me as your problem.
> [@](#):
>
> We need to understand everything we can, simply as a matter of good strategy, and understanding how the US and its past actions are perceived by the various sectors of Muslim and (if you will) “Muslim” society is of central importance to this.
WHY? I’d really appreciate an answer to this. WHY do we need to “perceive how the US and its past actions are perceived?” What difference does that make to what we must do now? Hello? Does anyone want to take a flier at this, or will you all simply parrot your assertion that it is “important,” as if you can convince me by repetition of that which you have failed entirely to explain. What good is knowing the hijackers’ motivations as we prepare to seek justice for the dead. Kindly do not again simply tell me that it _is_; that cuts no ice with me.
> [@](#):
>
> I find it appalling that some would counsel intentional omission of some of these factors, a thorough knowledge of which can surely help us win the war, because it might make some people feel bad or cast an unfavourable light on a country’s past.
Then I suggest you take that up with someone who has counseled such a thing. But unless or until you can show me one positive short-term gain, or some way in which it will make a scintilla of difference to our response, from a deeper understanding of the hijackers’ motivations, then do not expect me to agree with you. And kindly do not attribute to me motivations such as that we should not inquire because “people will feel bad” or “it will cast an unfavorable light on the country.” I have said – repeatedly – that I would not inquire into it because (a) it is largely irrelevant at this time; (b) it detracts from the task ahead; and © it comes dangerously close to _appearing_ to be an apology for the hijackers. For fuck’s sake people, I am happy to defend my position, but it would save me a lot of typing time if you didn’t willfully misrepresent it. And my thanks to TAMERLANE and CRANKY, who, though obviously not agreeing with me, at least _see_ my position and have not felt obliged to twist it in order to make it more amenable to attack.
> [@](#):
>
> It doesn’t excuse the thing; don’t be ridiculous. It makes it more important and of pressing urgence to understand it in greater depth than an individual crime.
**WHY???** Unless we intend to change our behavior to avoid further attacks – precisely the result sought by the hijackers – then what is the pressing urgency in understanding their grievances _now_?
> [@](#):
>
> It is my conviction that understanding what Fenris would have us refuse to understand will perforce make the exercise of justice easier and more efficient.
And yet you have failed entirely to articulate how, or why.
---
### Author:  [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/105 "2001-09-18T01:16:09Z")
STERRA –
> [@](#):
>
> What if their motivation is to lead the USA to fight on their terrain where they think they can win and unite the arab nations against America?
What if it is? Then we do not attack them? We do what, instead? – ah, the point at which the alternativists get stuck. We _must_ decisively act, and even if that is what they wanted, it is still what we must do. So, again, their motivation is irrelevant because it cannot change what must be done at this point. We _must_ have justice, and that means bringing to justice the parties responsible, wherever they may be.
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/106 "2001-09-18T01:21:00Z")
But justice is not always easy.
I don’t pretend to have all the answers. But one thing I know for sure is that we can’t continue to thumb our nose at the UN. We can’t continue to say, “Well, we’re a sovereign nation, and you can’t tell us what to do, blah blah blah…”
Jodi, I’ve always considered you a friend on this board, and I’m not attacking you personally. But right now, I feel like crying. I do not mean to say that those who were killed deserved it. No no no no no no! I’m simply stating that the US has done it’s fair share of shitty stuff as well. That we have sponsored and aided terrorism in the past is a fact. We have even trained them.
I guess I just don’t like the idea that it’s us vs. them when it comes to the rest of the world. What’s wrong with working together and everyone trying to find a solution? What’s wrong with caring about people?
(NOT that anyone here doesn’t care about people, just that I think that war isn’t always the answer-this could be another 1914)
---
### Author:  [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/107 "2001-09-18T01:29:29Z")
GUIN –
> [@](#):
>
> But justice is not always easy.
Who said it was? I anticipate war – a real, honest to goodness, probably drawn out, young men dying far from home war. I look upon this with no satisfaction. But I see no other solution. And I don’t see anyone else proposing one, either. As I have said, inaction is not an option. So what else are we to do? There comes a time when a nation is simply provoked beyond all toleration – when injury is inflicted so deeply and so remorselessly that turning the other cheek is not possible. I believe that time for us was September 11, 2001.
> [@](#):
>
> Jodi, I’ve always considered you a friend on this board, and I’m not attacking you personally. But right now, I feel like crying. I do not mean to say that those who were killed deserved it. No no no no no no! I’m simply stating that the US has done it’s fair share of shitty stuff as well. That we have sponsored and aided terrorism in the past is a fact. We have even trained them.
This is _precisely_ what I abhor in the strongest possible terms. To hear someone, in the wake of this monstrosity, say “well, the U.S. has done its fair share of shitty things as well” – as if we _deserved_ this. As if they can justify this. As if we are to blame. It makes me sick to my stomach. It makes me ashamed.
> [@](#):
>
> What’s wrong with working together and everyone trying to find a solution? What’s wrong with caring about people?
I am not responding to this. See my last post, above.
---
### Author:  [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/108 "2001-09-18T01:30:37Z")
Or, rather, see my next post below.
---
### Author:  [@Sterra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sterra)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/109 "2001-09-18T01:31:17Z")
> [@](#):
>
> What if it is? Then we do not attack them? We do what, instead? – ah, the point at which the alternativists get stuck. We must decisively act, and even if that is what they wanted, it is still what we must do. So, again, their motivation is irrelevant because it cannot change what must be done at this point. We must have justice, and that means bringing to justice the parties responsible, wherever they may be.
If we do what they want then they can manipulate us again by doing the same thing. If we do our best to get the other arab nations on our side before we attack possibly using some of their soldiers then that will stop pretty much any chance of the other countries uniting against us. That would require some big concessions to them on our part, but IMHO if we did that we could do that we would take most of the fight out of Bin Laden before any shots are fired.
---
### Author:  [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/110 "2001-09-18T01:31:43Z")
And I’m going home. I’ll pick this up tomorrow if I have time, and if somebody posts a reasonable explanation to this questions:
Why is the motivations of the hijackers – not their identity, nor who sent them, nor their culpability, but their motivations – relevant to our response in the coming few weeks? What “motivations” could they conceivably have that would change our response at this time? And what would we change that response to?
But I warn you that I will no longer be responding to people who stoop to misrepresenting my position as “nationalism” or as “not wanting the country’s image to be tarnished” or as any other insupportable nonsense. I don’t have the time to deal with it, and I don’t currently have the emotional energy to keep my temper while my position is twisted.
---
### Author:  [@Jodi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jodi)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/111 "2001-09-18T01:35:46Z")
STERRA –
> [@](#):
>
> If we do what they want then they can manipulate us again by doing the same thing.
This is obviously true. It does not change the fact that we still must do it, even if it is what they want. Again, what other option have we that will bring justice to the dead?
> [@](#):
>
> If we do our best to get the other arab nations on our side before we attack possibly using some of their soldiers then that will stop pretty much any chance of the other countries uniting against us.
So what difference does their motivation make? Even assuming they wanted us to attack Afganistan, are you saying we would then attempt to secure the cooperation of their Arab neighbors, when otherwise we would not? Clearly not. We are attempting to secure that cooperation as we speak, and regardless of the motivation – which, again, is irrelevant.
Now I’m really going home.
---
### Author:  [@beagledave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/beagledave)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/112 "2001-09-18T01:37:35Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Guinastasia \*
> \*\*But justice is not always easy.
>
> I don’t pretend to have all the answers. But one thing I know for sure is that we can’t continue to thumb our nose at the UN. We can’t continue to say, “Well, we’re a sovereign nation, and you can’t tell us what to do, blah blah blah…”
Well of course we ARE a sovereign nation that was attacked in three different locations. Is there another country on earth, that if attacked, would request advice on what to do about that attack from other countries? Because we are part of NATO, the nations of NATO may be involved in some sort of reponse, and the government is attempting to build up a coalition prior to any military response…so I don’t think the U.S. is acting in a vacuum, or without contact with other countries. I’m not sure what role the U.N. has in our reponse…can you explicitly define the role of the U.N. in our response to terrorists?
> [@](#):
>
> no no no no no no! I’m simply stating that the US has done it’s fair share of shitty stuff as well. That we have sponsored and aided terrorism in the past is a fact. We have even trained them.
I’m not sure that this is important news to the families of the civilians killed by the terrorists…or should change our minds in terms of any response.
> [@](#):
>
> I guess I just don’t like the idea that it’s us vs. them when it comes to the rest of the world. What’s wrong with working together and everyone trying to find a solution? What’s wrong with caring about people?
> (NOT that anyone here doesn’t care about people, just that I think that war isn’t always the answer-this could be another 1914) \*\*
Well…as I suggested above…in terms of a political and military response…it appears that the U.S. government IS attempting to build a coalition, including extending ties to middle-east countries (including Pakistan). Ultimately, it was the U.S. that was attacked in 3 locations, on our soil. It is ultimately the U.S. responsibility to defend itself.
Who exactly are you referring to in terms of “caring about people”? Who, is NOT, caring about people?
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/113 "2001-09-18T01:40:32Z")
I didn’t say YOU were nationalistic. I said sometimes our GOVERNMENT is.
You can love your country and yet abhor its wrongdoings. In my mind, to acknowledge what one’s country does wrong is important to making it better.
I am not saying that we have to right this second start blaming the US. I am saying, we need to start thinking more about how things are done here. Blind faith is ignorance.
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/114 "2001-09-18T01:42:12Z")
Often times, our government does not care. About the people in countries that we blatantly exploit.
And people SHOULD care about mistakes our country makes-because each time they do this, they go against everything we are supposed to stand for.
And btw, I did not mean anyone here has blind faith.
---
### Author:  [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/115 "2001-09-18T01:54:20Z")
So are we to conclude that doing what is right becomes wrong simply because it may please the terrorists? Are we to dig in our heels and refuse to do what is right \* just because\* what is right may also be something that terrorists desire of us?
Isn’t that the definition of cutting off one’s nose to spite one’s face?
stoid
---
### Author:  [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/116 "2001-09-18T02:00:19Z")
> [@](#):
>
> Wait a minute. Believing that we need not know every iota of detail about the motivations of the hijackers means I advocate “blindly striking out” against an entire region? There is then, in your lexicon, no space between comprensive knowledge of one subject and “blindness” of another? I am at a loss to know how to respond to this.
It’s just that when you’re dealing with something of this unprecedented scale, any amount of willful ignorance strikes me as irresponsible.
> [@](#):
>
> You grossly mischaracterize my position, and then you excuse it because “you have no other way to characterize it” except as something it patently is not.
Get over yourself. Not everything I attribute to “some people” or to “other people on this board” or what have you is in reference to you. I am making arguments; the fact that they are in _response_ to your statements doesn’t mean that they’re _against_ your statements.
I have never attributed any opinion to you personally at all. In fact, except for directly responding to your alarm at all of this, I’ve not even used your name or the second-person pronoun.
Except for - Oh, wait. Is this all because I quoted your sig? Could that be the case? Well, I must apologise if that’s what you thought. I only called it a “personal note to you” because it was your sig that made me come up with what I said. Had “Fiat Justitia” been **Guin** ’s sig, even, I’d have made it a personal note to _her._
To sum up, I don’t think I’m mischaracterizing your personal position for the reason that I haven’t characterized it at all. I’m responding to various viewpoints that have been bandied about in this thread and elsewhere by a variety of people. To the extent that you share the viewpoints I respond to, feel free to debate; to the extent that I’m responding to a viewpoint you don’t hold, feel free to ignore.
> [@](#):
>
> WHY? I’d really appreciate an answer to this. WHY do we need to “perceive how the US and its past actions are perceived?” What difference does that make to what we must do now? Hello? Does anyone want to take a flier at this, or will you all simply parrot your assertion that it is “important?” [snip] Unless we intend to change our behavior to avoid further attacks – precisely the result sought by the hijackers – then what is the pressing urgency in understanding their grievances _now_?
Try this on: Because the United States is a real country, with real armies, and real diplomats in real foreign states with real concerns of their own. Because behaving with a modicum of consideration for the situations and perceptions of states that could either be our\* allies, our enemies, or indifferent to us will greatly improve our strategic position, reduce loss of life, and speed bin Laden to either justice or his maker. Because history has taught us that almost without regard for the actual actions that one takes, making no effort to understand one’s enemy, especially in a terrorist situation, will lead to a constant cycle of violence that will be to nobody’s advantage. Because the world is big and wide and imposing blunt, abstract, _simplistic_ understandings on it will lead to no good end, backed up by no matter how many rivers of steel and blood.
Because knowledge, not ignorance, is strength.
> [@](#):
>
> © it comes dangerously close to _appearing_ to be an apology for the hijackers.
I would rather improve the chances for long-term global stability and the success of NATO’s anti-terrorism goal than worry about how things _appear._
By the way, if we mean to stamp out terrorism anyway, what does it matter what we appear to be doing in its regard at this stage?
---
### Author:  [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/117 "2001-09-18T02:06:13Z")
\*Incidentally: I say “our” because, however I may feel about it, Canada is the US’s ally and our sons and brothers will no doubt be dying along with yours when the time comes.
---
### Author:  [@milroyj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/milroyj)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/118 "2001-09-18T02:12:43Z")
Not that anyone cares what I post, but, some of you are making me sick as well. Especially the so-called “students of history” and other psuedo-philosophers on this board. Ya know, there is a word for what you are proposing, not retaliating, understanding their feelings, changing our foreign policy based on recent events.
The word is “APPEASEMENT”. Please look it up. For more info, contact Mr. Chamberlain, and see how well that worked out for England and the world.
---
### Author:  [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/119 "2001-09-18T02:18:56Z")
Who said anything about appeasement? Osama Bin Laden is NOT a Hitler-they are two different people.
I’m not suggesting we try and reason with the guy-I’m suggesting we lock him up and throw away the key-kill him, and you end up with ten more like him.
---
### Author:  [@Sterra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sterra)
#### Post date: [September 18, 2001, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167/120 "2001-09-18T02:20:46Z")
> [@](#):
>
> The word is “APPEASEMENT”. Please look it up. For more info, contact Mr. Chamberlain, and see how well that worked out for England and the world.
Keep in mind that that was the 2nd world war. Which mostly occured because of how the first one was handled.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167.md?page=5)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/we-dont-need-to-understand-the-issues-that-led-to-tuesdays-atrocities/82167.md?page=7)