Remembrance on 9/11

What about Somalia? No oil interests, just human rights violations by a warlord. We lost 18 soldiers and the Somalis lost over 300. Not to mention the approximately 1.2 million that starved to death both before and after the Americans were there.

Also, I will point out that the Gulf War was perpetuated by a UN coalition. The US just took the role as leader. Same in Kosovo and Bosnia. We weren't the only ones involved. That is why GW went before the UN to tell them that they need to do something about Iraq. If not then the US will uphold the terms of surrender on their own.

 

I shall stop since I can’t see how to make myself clearer. That’s not what I said. You appear to always miss the word ‘only’. To me they are not mutually exclusive, that’s why I said the word ‘only’. But if ‘only’ it is remembered, yes they will become mutually exclusive. The talk about the Palestine plight falls on deaf ears on the US. 2.3 million were killed, directly or indirectly, in Afghanistan. Is US action questioned by its population? Talk about the importance in today’s world of an International Tribunal. Sorry, your media exposure argument seems too weak for me. Little Bush says he will win the war on terror that started on the WTC at any cost. Fun fact: it didn’t start there. Can’t you see that the WTC tragedy is becoming a tool for more bloodshed? How to stop this? By have genuine sympathy? In my opinion no. The sympathy a bomber pilot feels for them while decimating is real enough. So how to impede that the 2,500 deaths become a reason for more bloodshed? In my opinion, by placing it in its bloody context.
The reason I didn’t answer your hypothetical question is because I could give only a hypothetical answer, and I don’t have enough trust in myself to be honest. If the thread was a remembrance about, say, Jenin or East Timor I don’t think I would mention it; but, like I said, this is not going to happen, if stuff like this happened often my reaction here would be different. If anyone said that terrorists are righteous, I would mention it; but this is an easy case.
A comparison crossed my mind. Since I was a kid I was very shocked by Nazi death camps scenes, to the point of having nightmares. I feel extremely disgusted and angered on the many occasions this is used to justify more atrocities. Any critique of Israel politics is labeled anti-Semitism. Image of piles of dead bodies don’t leave my head, and this image is used so that Israel can have its own ghettos.
We are at the brink of more bloodshed. The WTC is being used to justify that. The anger, real and justified, is being channeled to more slaughter. The only way, right now, to treat the WTC as a tragedy is to refuse to isolate it from the context. It is not necessarily this way, like not all Holocaust remembrances are. That was not Windmill’s intention. But this usage is happening right now. If the difference isn’t stated and made clear, this remembrance will be thrown in the lot, just fitting in the context.
Well, it appears that I haven’t stopped.

I never claimed it was. I said it was treated this way. Compare the way people talk about it.

Small nit: the attack was before UN’s approval. Anyway you should check the UN and US tensions, and strengths. UN isn’t, unfortunately, the neutral international institution it should be.

You sure? Certainly no oil. But check your facts. Think of US’ political interests in Somalia’s region. It was not about the righteous anger of civil rights by a warlord.

 

wood is tree

Strange how Iraq asked USA if it would be ok if they took back there southern land (Kuwait) and the USA said it was ok and they wouldn't get involved. Funny how pressure from the rest of the world can change the view of USA. I guess you cant trust your friends then.

 

Thanks for at least keeping in mind what my initial intention was!

Indeed, I did not think that 9/11 and only 9/11 was important when I started the thread. I'm not ignorant of the plight of the rest of the world. But it seemed an apt thing to do, at the time, considering the day.

I feel strange having to speak "for America" - because I myself was not even born here, but was raised here, which makes me American enough, but, for the record:

Not ALL americans are responsible for the actions of their leadership. I assume this should be obvious on the surface, but I think sometimes it gets a little lost in the fervour. :wink:

Speaking of the fervour, don't worry if I'm upset the topic got derailed. It's past the "commemorative day" anyway, and what's more - It's actually taken an interesting direction. If it had turned into a mindless flame war then, yes, I would have been peeved. But you folks (and I mean ALL of you, with whom I agree with and don't) are so wonderful that you've managed to dissent using valid thought, knowledge, and ideas.

I suppose that's why I - like Sheriff and Milo, I noticed on another thread - I came for tips on Arcanum, but stayed because of the intelligent (and sometimes hilarious) conversation going on here. You all are so damn GREAT!

So please, keep the discussion going! It's great to see so much sincere thought, respect, and sheer passion there is among you. There's alot I've learned since you all got off-topic on this thread, and I can honestly say I can see both sides of the coin. (and it's the same coin - we all started off with general good intentions for humanity, but disagree on the details).

Ah one more thing -

I've actually always taken issue with that idea. I mean, for me, what else IS THERE to talk about but politics and religion? We can't just talk about how nice the weather is all day...well I guess there's Sex..but if all you did was talk about the weather and sex all day you'd be labeled quite odd.

To the contrary, political and religious discussions don't have to be avoided among friends, if those friends are mature and open minded. You all have been the very model of this.

I'm so glad to have found this place.

 

I can see why (like me) people are qusetioning the USA (and UK) specifically at this time, but since when was the Gulf War fought only between the USA and Iraq?

As I recall, a large proportion of the international community joined in the effort and although they took their usual extra-long time to do it, the UN eventually came out in favour of opposing Iraq, too.

It is convenient for people who are prejudiced against the US (DU, Dennis and others) to misrepresent it as all about the USA's oil interest, but it wasn't only them and it wasn't only about oil.

DU, since you buy Iraq's justification about Kuwait, what about their genocide attempts against the Kurds? Were they slant drilling somewhere too?

What about the brutal crushing of the Shiite Muslim opposition?

Dennis, don't you think comments like

are just a litte unfair considering the debate raging within the US population and media? Considering the tendancy for every major decision made by the US government to be openly opposed and deabted by some portion of its population?

The actions of the US are questioned by everyone, including their own population. I think that's a good thing, personally, but for you to then misrepresent it and pretend, or perhaps allow your prejudice to blind yourself to, it is wrong.

In order to debate any of these charged issues, we have to debate them fairly. Failing to be honest and fair about both sides of the argument leads to breakdown. For example, your misrepresentation gives all the warmongers a nice little side topic to focus on and lets them feel self-righteous about the fact the USA isn't getting a fair hearing.

When a war is looming, and we need to see clearly, people who misrepresenet either side of the argument, or treat one party unfairly, or indulge their own prejudices, are ALL pushing us nearer to actual war. Only people who fairly deal with everyone have a chance of real diplomatic success.

I KNOW there are Americans who do not deal fairly with foreigners. I know there are a large numbe rof people (in almost every country) who consider foreign problems less important than home ones. I have been vocal against them in the past and will be so in future. However, there are also a large number of people on this board who do not deal fairly with the USA, you inlcuded. Until you do, you're contributing to the strife and tension and not helping anyone - Palestinian, Afghan, Iraqi, Brit, American, Australian or Brazilian.

A possible starting place is to admit - without qualification or condition - that the people who died in the WTC were innocent and did not provoke the attack and that the grief and fear of the people left behind is not only valid and understandable, but on some level unavoidable.

 

First thank You Vlad the Imposter for pointing out Somalia, for those with selective memories.

Second someone claimed that the US gave Iraq the green light for invasion. Like 1) we would have the right to do such a thing, and 2) we would do this to a country that we had a major interest in (DUH!) Please provide facts b4 spreading rumors. As far as I know this is a Rumor with no basis in fact if you have a link proving me wrong then please do if not then it's just another Iraqi spread lie...

Ok so even if this was true are you saying that for this reason Iraq should have invaded Kuwait and killed thousands of people ? Whatever happened to the UN? Where did Diplomacy go?

That is not a reality that is YOUR personal belief, this man has torn his country apart in two wars (which HE started) that he did not win and he STILL walks around shooting a rifle and talking smack. And that is NOT the only thing the US is saying. The main thing that the US is saying is "Shit, Saddam has violated his peace treaty for over a DECADE now, he will not provide proof of disarming as a matter of fact he is building up his troupes. What are we going to do now? Hang around for another decade and see what he does our disarm his country FOR him since he seems hell bent on breaking the law." That is what my country is saying.

A good question and my answer is that the UN has a little thing called the "rules of engagement" which clearly states that when a country gives up you MUST stop hostilities and "Sue for peace" Before we could get close enough to really hurt him Saddam waived the flag and we sat down and talked terms for UNCONDITIONAL Peace. They signed this agreement which clearly stated that they had to disarm and provide proof of having disarmed all weapons of mass destruction. Ten years later they still have not done this. Let me be very clear here: By not doing as they have said they have in effect broken their peace treat this alone according to treaty can be considered and ACT OF WAR. It was not a request it was a condition.

Again see above other countries did not invade their neighbors twice nor have other countries violated any peace treaties.

No the reality is that there are rules and laws and everyone in the UN is playing by them everyone EXCEPT Saddam cause rules don't apply to him let him do what he wants. Right? Well where I come from you either play by the rules or you get out of the game. If Iraq wants to leave the UN then let him go, but if he wants to stay then he sure as better play by the rules cause the rest of US are getting very tired of his lies and his games...

 

Hel Khat, analogies aren't that useful in this kind of debate. For example, I would say a more accurate version of the one you quoted would be.

• Someone in your neighbourhood takes a shit on your neighbour's lawn.
• The neighbourhood committee (whatever) agrees to have a serious talk to him about it.
• You and your dad don't think that's strong enough and say that if he doesn't let you into his house to prove he's using his toilet properly, you're going to go around and kick the shit out of him and force him onto the toilet.
• The neighbours disagree, pointing out you have no right into his house and anyway you're the biggest guy on the block so it wouldn't be a fair fight.
• You all end up out on the street in your nightclothes shouting at each other, while the guy who started it all quietly takes another shit on someone's lawn (or possibly sits at home developing methods of mass shitting)

Please bear in mind that the above is an example of why talking metphorically about important political events is NOT useful. It isn't meant to prove anything about the Iraq situation.

 

I wasn’t going to answer, but I changed my mind. Anyway this is going to be my last response to you here.

I have been saying that since my first post. I refused to simply pay homage for the reasons that I have already said too many times to repeat.

I also said that. It’s just because it’s very real that it has the potential of causing great disaster.

Yet you fail to hear all sides. You didn’t think of the terrorists’ arguments. To do this, you must suspend, albeit temporally, the belief that the WTC victims were innocents. I did, and came to the conclusion that I wholeheartedly disagree with them. The victims were completely innocent; their killings a tragedy.
You say that I am blinded by prejudice against US; that I don’t pay attention to their arguments. Well, I do. I know them more than I know the terrorists’. I read them every day I read the News. I also know some of US’ actions. I thought and I judged.
The US killed civilians in many countries; political assassinations, massacres (directly and indirectly); civilian causalities sky high. How do you call it? I call it State-terrorism. Do you think the objective of Iraq’s sanctions is to see if Saddan becomes one of famine’s victims? If not, them what’s the logic of this sanctions? How do you call this strategy?
Now the plot for a terrorist attack comes from Afghanistan. What right does it give for the US to bomb that country? The same that Nicaragua, Cuba, Lebanon etc have to bomb US: none at all.

How many times you see the Afghanistan attack’s legality being questioned in the mass media? How many times do the suffering caused by sanctions to Iraq are associated to the war to come? Almost all, if not all, articles do with: “will it be effective?, “will Americans die?�, “is it a too great drain in the economy?�. Is the fact that US had act without giving any proof ever questioned?
There are dissident voices, maybe many. But the powerful media corporations play the same tune.
I agree that I have been unfair with US population’s reactions (but not with the media’s). This is something more subtle that I don’t have much access. I have based my opinion on things like opinion pools and mass media. Nothing reliable enough to assume that the volume of dissident voices isn’t loud.

 

I'll leave it at that then. There is no point me just saying "You are wrong on almost every point," which is what I would be doing.

I'd just like you to know, that this whole thing has been an eye-opener for me and from now on your political arguments, even when coinciding with my own, will seem hollow to me, because I know that there is no feeling for humans motivating them - it is just dogma.

 

I honestly don't think you have much room to talk, All you seem to do is preach about this and about that. My arguments are not valid HIS arguments are not valid because of this reason or that reason! nWho are you GOD or something? I say shit or get off the pot this whiny in between "eyeopening" stuff is getting to be a bit much. I can at least respect Dennis Moore even if i do not agree with him cause i know he has a set of beliefs! Fatman I have been listening to you critque and rave for MONTHS now and I still have no idea where you stand on anything! Either you are wholely for something or wholely against it either way please be a man and say something about how you feel instead of critquing everyone cause you are fast losing any crediblity you may have had with this on "I'm on the fence but I have the voice of God" Crap.

 

Hoho - how very amusing, all things considered.

Shall I apologise for not being extreme or prejudiced or narrow-minded enough for you? I don't think so. Being "in between" is more comfortable for me, because I'm not as good at your brand of selective blindness. If you want me to "pick sides" and either say "the US are entirely evil" or "the US are entirely good," you are going to be disappointed.

Yes, the USA have at times been warlike and interfered in other countries for their own benefit. Yes, for a long time some of its citizens have been blinded by the cultural introspection, leading to some very poor knowledge of the outside world and some very skewed views (like yours).

No, the 9/11 victims did not in any way deserve to die. No, we should not be pleased that their death bought a wake-up call to the USA. Yes, innocents being murdered is deserving of sympathy rather than mockery.

This outburst was truly reminiscent of your time as Eros and ... Tyrnan (was it?). I wonder whether you'll be childish enough to let it escalate to the point where someone re-applies your ban.

 

Well, Hel Khat, since you did me the “favor� of defending me by dragging this up let me state my differences with Sheriff Fatman.
I don’t feel like discussing these stuff right now. So I’ll just make some broad and questionable generalizations and won’t even defend them.

Sort of. Direct violence has been out of US’ agenda for a while. But in my opinion the ‘interference for own benefits’ is still happening, with much violence as a result.

After a while I have become a bit blinded to the word ‘some’ in the above quote. This has made me assume potentially dangerous political positions.

No, they didn’t.

I don’t think that’s part of the original discussion. I think your phrasing is a bit unfair but you do have a point.

Yes, although I don’t share your disgust with the tragedy jokes.

In this thread I have acted very wrongly. It was dumb hatred and partial blindness that made me refuse to pay homage. I would still stand by some of my arguments were they isolated and elsewhere. But they are here, in a context in which they are sheer stupidity, pure poison.


Hel Khat, It doesn’t matter that I have changed my mind. You used me to attack someone else. Don’t do this again.

 

I do not know where you get off saying any of this. I (and many others here) have been having discussions with the good Sheriff for a long while now. As he can tell you I am just about as patriotic as they come. "Jingoistic" to some. Enough so that I gave up almost 11 years of my life in service to this country. But I am not blind. This country has issues just like any other. Sheriff does a very good job at pointing some of those out. He also does a good job pointing out its strong points. I believe that he may be one of the fairest people I have ever had the chance to converse with. He always puts a great deal of research into his factual posts, and a great deal of feeling into his opinionated posts. I have very rarely seen him openly attack someone on this board. He will point out mistakes in facts and blindness in thoughts. His postings are always enlightening and sometimes humorous.

The fact that you don't know where he stands on issues only proves that you (1) don't read his posts - or - (2) are too ignorant to understand them.

Unlike Sheriff, I have no qualms about openly attacking someone, so I will leave you with this. If you don't like the people here, FUCK OFF and post your hateful shit somewhere else.

 

Amen to all the above.

 

It was Tyr Raven

Ok so now I understand. I was not trying to be hateful but it's not easy to try and understand someone who you feel is always picking on you and yet not clearly stating their views. As a person I honestly like you as a debator you can be very intimidating (to say the least). I have asked you questions and you often reply by ignoring them and tearing into me (sorry but that's how I feel sometimes).

I am sorry that I offended you by sounding angry cause I was not angry I was frustrated cause I feel that sometimes you won't reply to me without snapping at me in someway. Anyway I am sorry.

I am also sorry if I offended anyone else, I was trying to make an example of something not trying to slander anyones good name.....

 

Apology accepted.

I wasn't all that offended. I was more just kinda questioning myself and stuff - until Vlad and Retard made me feel better (thanks to both of them for that).