9/11 - Al Qaeda or the U.S.?

[Aqua Dragon]

no, no ship is ever worth a war

If the country destroyed your ship, and knew they were destroying it, and were not willing to do anything to conpensate for it, then yes... Because it only STARTS at the ship... what next?

 

[Varine]

Well, it would only be logical too attack your attacker, or not?

If they attack your harbor, wouldn't you send an Atomic bomb?
If they destroyed your two tallest buildings, and damaged your economy, would you not go to their country and kill the dictator, in search of WoMD?
If they destroyed your ship, would you not enter WWI?

It could be quite logical to fight back, sometimes people just want to believe that there's something fishy. I used to think there was a conspiracy, but not anymore. I doubt the government would give up that much, to get little in return, unless maybe they owned those private companies, which doesn't seem to be the case.

We invaded Afghanistan in search of Bin Laden.
We invaded Iraq a few years later because they had weapons that they weren't allowed to have according to Resolutions 660, 661, 678, 686, 687, 688, 707, 715, 968, 1284, and, the pre-invasion offering, 1441. They also violated various others, although I'm not entirely sure if they directly applied to Iraq.
We didn't use the Atomic Bomb on Japan until they refused to accept our surrender terms, and although they were really on their last legs and would have raised the white flag had we allowed their Emperor to remain in his position, there was no way to know of this at the time. Although the decision was a little illogical, it was a chance we saw to end the war immediatly and save the lives of what we expected to be many more.
And in World War I, we didn't enter the war after the Lusitania was sunk. It was after the message offering an alliance to Mexico that we entered. They sank the ship in 1915; we entered in 1917.

Sorry... I just had to correct you on those things.

If the country destroyed your ship, and knew they were destroying it, and were not willing to do anything to conpensate for it, then yes... Because it only STARTS at the ship... what next?

As much as I agree with that, it's unfortunately not true. In 2000, the Al' Qaeda attack the USS Cole and killed 17 sailors. And Clinton, being the great president he was, did nothing. At least Bush is doing it now... better late than never.

And you're right, it does start with the one thing. At least, that's what history tells us (Hitler comes to mind with this).

 

[esb]

Germany was attacking unrestrictly, and it wasn't the first time it attacked passive ships. And like aguter said, it starts on ships, what's next?
Also, Germany's power was increasing, and the US needed to do something about it, as Germany could later turn into a threat against US too.

So, these comparisons are reasonable, as they fall in pretty much the same situation as 9/11.

EDIT: Oh Need more lessons then. Although, they never did find any weapons of mass destruction.

 

[Varine]

EDIT: Oh Need more lessons then. Although, they never did find any weapons of mass destruction.

Yes, we did. It relies on whether you wish to believe the reports of our military and government officials, which I know a lot of people won't, but we did find them regardless of what you believe. We didn't find any nuclear programs (although I believe we found enriched Uranium, but I may be mistaking it with another country. But I'm pretty sure I'm right, I was talking about it with my CO the other day, but I might have been confused with the topic country. Anyway, assuming I'm right, how many things can you do with enriched Uranium?)

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=060622055545.07o4imol&show_article=1
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81935,00.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/08/13/AR2005081300530.html
http://www.armytimes.com/legacy/new/0-ARMYPAPER-1918962.php (Army Times is an independant magazine, not owned by the Army, so it's not going to be AS biased)

 

[esb]

Bah, I guess we can blame it on the media. Or the gov. not wanting us to know these things(which I doubt). And the people for believing it...

It's hard to know what's real and what's not these days.

 

[Varine]

Bah, I guess we can blame it on the media. Or the gov. not wanting us to know these things(which I doubt). And the people for believing it...

It's hard to know what's real and what's not these days.

Well, when I was in Iraq I saw a few things that in my mind would have been reason to go to war, and I saw pictures of the chemcical weapons that some of my friends had.
But, the government might have just put all of that there.

 

[Seb!]

Like the USA doesn't have weapons? They didn't attack us.. So why did we attack them.

 

[The Helper]

Yes. They put all of it out there. No question.

Yup, they have still not been able to prove anything they said about the Weapons of Mass Destruction were real. It is a damn shame that more people cannot accept that fact or just have not heard about it. It is the medias fault, imho.

 

[Seb!]

I don't think America cares, as long as they get to kill foreigners and promote more fights. Chemical weapons, WMD's, it makes no difference to the these faith based crusaders.

 

[konerboy]

the first attacks on iraq was insane, they wanted to free the iraq people (damn where are the data from the first attack) and they did that by dropping missiles in the middle of a city, their target was clearly civilians, and they properly wanted the government and locals to react and attack the americans back to start a war.!! they started this meaning less war!!

 

[esb]

Ah yes, I think it was called the Shock and Awe? something like that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe

No one got hurt. It was just to make people poop themselves since it was big and flashy.

 

[konerboy]

someone got hurt alot of people died from that attack, of course someone will react

 

[Varine]

Like the USA doesn't have weapons? They didn't attack us.. So why did we attack them.

Iraq did attack us in 1993, and Clinton was just too useless a president to do anything.

Konerboy - It's a war, people get hurt that shouldn't. Happens in every war, it's just that no one brings it up unless they want to use it as an argument to go against said war.
What was the death count in the initial invasion? 6500 or so? Chances are if we didn't invade, Hussein and the Republican Guard probably would have killed far more. And you really need to work on your grammar, because I'm having issues understand what you're saying.

I don't think America cares, as long as they get to kill foreigners and promote more fights. Chemical weapons, WMD's, it makes no difference to the these faith based crusaders.

Yes, the only thing that we as Americans want is to kill non-Americans. You nailed that one.

How did this topic even get to Iraq?

 

[New_U.S.]

Ah yes, I think it was called the Shock and Awe? something like that?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_and_awe

No one got hurt. It was just to make people poop themselves since it was big and flashy.

Shock and Awe was the bombing raid on Baghdad right before the invasion. This was actually quickly added on right before the invasion based on bad intel reports saying that they had Saddom's position. Origenal plans were to enter the country before they knew it and sweep through.

I really am a little disgusted that this thread got restarted. A little bit of a better question is it ethical to say that the U.S. government did something like this? One main thing to do before starting a good debate is that the end result after it is over benefits us positivly. What does this thread do? Once everyone is sick of hearing your bullshit and its just TH's massive number of conspiracy theorists bashing the U.S. with weak evidence, then what?

Heres my previous arguement: I posted it over a month ago

Spoiler

Heres a thought that must be taken into consideration....

Although three planes hit their targets, one plane did not. It is usually sadly overlooked that a fourth flight was sent to hit somewhere in Washington DC. This plane however was crashed by the passengers. Discovery runs a documentary called 'The Flight that Fought Back'. In this documentary, they go through what happened. From the audio from the flight, you can tell the plane had been hijacked by terrorists. Suicide missions such as this are nothing new. First witnessed by the U.S. in WWII against the Japanesse, the suicide bomber became a effective weapon. More recently this tactic has been highly used by Hezbollah, and then adopted by al Queda. Since Hezbollah is not 'at war' with the U.S., and al Queda is, you can assume that al Queda would be the terrorist group backing this (this is also backed by al Queda taking credit for the attack after the attacks). Westerners do not understand suicide bombings. You are assuming the CIA did this. No person from the U.S. could pull this off psycologically. Concience cannot be ignored. Radical islamic sects could do this because they are fighting 'for God'.

Looking at the fact that the plane was hijacked and would be used as a suicide bomb, and that the likely group to do this would be al Queda, logically you can assume that that plane was hijacked by al Queda operatives to attack some place in Washington. If this is true, then the other planes would be hijacked by al Queda logically.

Now that we have looked at who would logically do this, we must look why to attack.

al Quedas motives are easy to guess. Strike fear into Americans. Do damage on American soil. Kill Americans. Make a statement. Theres a long list of motives for al Queda. However the U.S. governments reasons for doing this are shorter.

This attack would let the U.S. invade Afghanistan, the base of al Queda. This is what the U.S. did. I fail to see the great use of fighting a usless country that had been previously armed by the U.S. If the U.S. felt that al Queda was enough of a threat to take out the Taliban, and they needed a pretext to invade, there are many better options that don't need 3000+ sacrificed American lives. A media flame campaign against them would have worked equally.

The only other motive for the U.S. government being behind this is so they can have better control of the homeland. This better control leads to randomly changing 'terror levels' and bullshit laws like the Patriot Act being passed. These sure got Bush far.

My final question against this is from one of the movies previously posted. It was said that a U.S. hospital was hosting Osama bin Landin just before 9/11. I must say if the U.S. was behind this and they would have known they are going to war against al Queda, why wouldn't they capture him there and a few months later say that they captured him? Makes absolutely no sense.

After all of this you must keep in mind who would do this and motive. These are greater then any tapes. Looking what happened from what happened and using a bit of logic instead of looking at frame by frame and think you see something, you can logically prove that this attack was done by al Queda, not the United States government.

The government is not good. Its made some horrible mistakes. However it is not stupid enough to do this.

Questions, comments, concerns, and your opinions are happily taken.

~New_U.S.

How did this topic even get to Iraq?

TY!

 

[Varine]

I think that most people posting here, the majority of which being 15 to 18 or so probably, might not know that we didn't invade Iraq until 2003. So how about we disregard the invasion of Iraq and focus back on why the Towers and Pentagon were attacked? Unless, of course, you ran out of arguments and wish to continue bashing Iraq....

 

[esb]

Al quaeda is angry at Western Influence in Muslim religion, such as women not covering themselves, etc.
Just like they banned youtube, they want to isolate themselves. I say, why not? But, the muslims don't want any of that.

 

[konerboy]

hey you live in new york, did you see the attack?

 

[esb]

I had an armenian friend. During the time of the attacks, her father was normal, and would laugh at times (he was watching it) while she was crying. Then he got mad and asked her wtf she was crying for. He said that when he was younger, back in her home country, he saw and experienced things way worse than that.

There's many things out there that we don't realize, and the media only shows us what they think will affect us, depending on who's side they want us on.

 

[Varine]

Al quaeda

Al' Qaeda has no U.

hey you live in new york, did you see the attack?

I was living there at the time, yes. But being 13 or so, I didn't really understand what was happening.

 

[esb]

Sorry about the typo?

I think this 'debate' is getting to a point that it's pointless.
Why? Because it's like arguing if god exists. Neither side can prove that it did happen, nor that it didn't happen.

Sure you can throw facts here and there that might lead to the suggestion that it did/n't happen, but that's as far as it'll get.