|
|
|
bestonnet_00
Skeptic Friend
Australia
358 Posts |
 Posted - 09/13/2001 : 01:04:08
|
One must ask to what extent did the US bring the events of the 11th on itself?
Whilst these questions may be hard to answer, particulary for some Americans, they must be asked if we are to ever understand and prevent such an event from happening again.
US involvement in Afganisatain has been through the CIA that has been indescriminantly arming anyone who said they will fight the Soviets. Iraq practically had its military mostly financed by the US. US policies in the middle east and arms supplies to Isreal have caused deaths.
As well as better security and bombing the terrorists out of existance (I just hope whoever planned it gets a slow and painful death) the US should examine every policy it has that could have provided motivation to the terrorists. Quite a large amount of these shouldn't have ever been implemented.
<HR>
Radioactive GM Crops.
Slightly above background.
Safe to eat.
But no activist would dare rip it out.
As they think it gives them cancer.
|
|
|
ktesibios
SFN Regular
USA
505 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2001 : 14:01:16 [Permalink]
|
I recently read a book by one of the Navy divers who worked on rescue and salvage operations at Pearl Harbor.
One of the first things they encountered on one of their first dives was an unexploded bomb- actually an armor-piercing shell with fins welded on.
When they got it clear of the wreck, they realized that it was American! An obsolete shell that had been sold to Japan as scrap.
Blowback is not a new phenomenon.
Considering what's come out about how the Bin Laden network got its start in the Soviet-Afghani war, and the amount of training and weaponry poured into that country which had its origin in the U.S., I wouldn't just question policies which might have provided "motivation".
I'd seriously question the wisdom of any policy that provides any free-lance armed group with anything more dangerous than a gift certificate from Sharper Image.
Boris Karloff died for your sins. |
 |
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2001 : 14:34:03 [Permalink]
|
I can't help but agree with the above comments but I think it should be noted that the only weapons turned against us of our making Tuesday were commercial jetliners.
The policies that helped there were probably more in the area of aiport security and intelligence than foreign military aid.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 09/15/2001 : 14:49:02 [Permalink]
|
Although the US has done things that I have strongly been against, I realize that foreign relations is a juggling high wire act.
Back Isreal, and palestians get pissed.
Back the palestians and Israel gets pissed.
Try to appease both, and both get pissed.
Ignore both and well, all hell breaks loose.
You can't win for loosing...
Add to that the fact that we are still, fundamentally, an isolationist country. Most americans couldn't care less about anything beyond the borders...
"Goddammit! The world is just filling up with more and more idiots! And the computer is giving them access to the world! They're
spreading their stupidity! At least they were contained before--now they're on the loose everywhere!"? |
|
|
|
bestonnet_00
Skeptic Friend
Australia
358 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 01:30:46 [Permalink]
|
Damned if you do, damned if you don't.
It would be a lot better if people could actually get along. But alas that probably wont happen for a long time.
Radioactive GM Crops.
Slightly above background.
Safe to eat.
But no activist would dare rip it out.
As they think it gives them cancer. |
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 05:56:46 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Most americans couldn't care less about anything beyond the borders...
I disagree. I think that most Americans just don't have access to what is going on. All summer long, the Middle East was burning with bombings and assasinations. The corporate media (especially TV) gave us a summer of Condit, shark attacks, and Presidential photo ops. Seems rather irresponsible in retrospect.
Greg.
|
|
|
|
Donnie B.
Skeptic Friend
417 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 06:17:05 [Permalink]
|
Greg,
Your comments are most insightful.
One might argue, however, that when it comes to news coverage, the American public gets what it wants. Condit and shark attacks sell Chevys, while the images from Palestine send people reaching for the remote.
-- Donnie B.
Brian: "No, no! You have to think for yourselves!" Crowd: "Yes! We have to think for ourselves!" |
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 06:35:09 [Permalink]
|
quote:
One might argue, however, that when it comes to news coverage, the American public gets what it wants. Condit and shark attacks sell Chevys, while the images from Palestine send people reaching for the remote.
True however, the resopnsibility of the News media is to inform the public. Not to sell Chevys. For that, we can thank deregulation of the networks.
Greg.
|
|
|
|
Donnie B.
Skeptic Friend
417 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 07:34:28 [Permalink]
|
quote:
quote:
One might argue, however, that when it comes to news coverage, the American public gets what it wants. Condit and shark attacks sell Chevys, while the images from Palestine send people reaching for the remote.
True however, the resopnsibility of the News media is to inform the public. Not to sell Chevys. For that, we can thank deregulation of the networks.
I think what you meant was, their responsibility should be to inform the public. In fact, the networks are commercial enterprises and their primary responsibility is to make money for their shareholders.
As you say, deregulation has put even more pressure on the bottom line, by eliminating the requirement that FCC licensees demonstrate a public benefit when they renew their right to use the public spectrum space.
-- Donnie B.
Brian: "No, no! You have to think for yourselves!" Crowd: "Yes! We have to think for ourselves!" |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 08:33:15 [Permalink]
|
We - our government - may have layed the ground work for the views of the US in that part of the world, yet, ultimately the responsibility lies with those who chose to plan (for possibly 5 years) and execute this act of terrorism.
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
|
Piltdown
Skeptic Friend
USA
312 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 10:14:12 [Permalink]
|
quote:
One must ask to what extent did the US bring the events of the 11th on itself?
Whilst these questions may be hard to answer, particulary for some Americans, they must be asked if we are to ever understand and prevent such an event from happening again.
US involvement in Afganisatain has been through the CIA that has been indescriminantly arming anyone who said they will fight the Soviets. Iraq practically had its military mostly financed by the US. US policies in the middle east and arms supplies to Isreal have caused deaths.
As well as better security and bombing the terrorists out of existance (I just hope whoever planned it gets a slow and painful death) the US should examine every policy it has that could have provided motivation to the terrorists. Quite a large amount of these shouldn't have ever been implemented.
Every disaster is rooted in past policies. All through the Cold War, far-right forces in this country yammered that our support for Stalin during WW2 was the cause of the dilemna confronting us. They were right in the sense that allowing the Nazis to win the war would have prevented the rise of the Soviet Union. So what? The civilized world was fighting for its life against a monstrous tyranny, and the alliance with Stalin was a weapon in that war. It worked, too. The Nazis were beaten.
In the case of Afghanistan, allowing the Soviets to seize the country might have prevented or delayed their ultimate collapse. Some do not see that as a bad thing, but the risk of nuclear holocaust was very real during those years, and a few more years of tension might have pushed it over the edge. This is especially so if success in Afghanistan had allowed Soviet hardliners to prevent the appointment of Mikhail Gorbachev.
Even at the time, I had serious doubts about supporting Muslim fundamentalist forces against the Soviet Union. WW2 era politicians had doubts about supporting Stalin. They did it anyway. The outcome, the Cold War and the nuclear standoff, was terrible but it was not as bad as Nazi victory, which was the most likely alternative.
There are a lot of "what ifs" and these policies could be second guessed forever. The outcome we see is not the worst possible one, it is only the worst one that was realized.
Abducting UFOs and conspiring against conspiracy theorists since 1980.
Edited by - Piltdown on 09/16/2001 10:17:24 |
|
|
|
Greg
Skeptic Friend
USA
281 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 11:16:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I think what you meant was, their responsibility should be to inform the public. In fact, the networks are commercial enterprises and their primary responsibility is to make money for their shareholders.
As you say, deregulation has put even more pressure on the bottom line, by eliminating the requirement that FCC licensees demonstrate a public benefit when they renew their right to use the public spectrum space.
-- Donnie B.
Their resposibility did not change with deregulation, it only made it unenforceable.
Greg.
|
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 11:57:37 [Permalink]
|
Very well put Piltdown. Foreign Policy is a high wire act, and occasionaly you fall off...
Although I am critical of some of the decisions my government has made in the past, far FAR worse decisions could have been made.
I've been reading various things on Usenet by various pollyannas (notably noam chomsky worshippers). Gee, I wish we really did live in such a rose colored world...
The ironic thing, is that Noam Chomsky and Falwell are sure sounding a whole lot alike, blaming everybody but the kitchen sink.
"Goddammit! The world is just filling up with more and more idiots! And the computer is giving them access to the world! They're
spreading their stupidity! At least they were contained before--now they're on the loose everywhere!"? |
|
|
|
marvin
Skeptic Friend
77 Posts |
Posted - 09/16/2001 : 12:21:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
...our Prophet, Muhammad Bin-'Abdallah, who said "I have been sent with the sword between my hands to ensure that no one but God is worshipped, God who put my livelihood under the shadow of my spear and who inflicts humiliation and scorn on those who disobey my orders." ---fatawa Feb. 1998
Jerry Falwell and bin Laden seem to think alike. Mr. Laden sees himself as the righteous arm of a vengeful God and Mr. Falwell sees God as punishing us for our sinful ways. Both are using their religion to rationalize their beliefs and actions. Only Jerry doesn't train any suicidal soldiers and place them in ‘cells' all over the world.
|
|
|
|
bestonnet_00
Skeptic Friend
Australia
358 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 01:33:02 [Permalink]
|
Ultimately the responsibility does lie with those who planned the attacks. But they may have done it because of past US action like bombing Lebonon for terrorist action when it was really Sriya or shooting down an Iranian A300.
One must ask what could have been done differently to prevent something like the 11th happening again. It may be painful and it wont bring back the thousands of people who died. But it may prevent a simliar occurance in the future.
Radioactive GM Crops.
Slightly above background.
Safe to eat.
But no activist would dare rip it out.
As they think it gives them cancer. |
|
|
|
Trish
SFN Addict
USA
2102 Posts |
Posted - 09/18/2001 : 09:33:13 [Permalink]
|
Iranian A300 - I'm going to assume that you are referring to the passenger plane that was warned against entering airspace around a US Battle Group in International waters. Um, maybe you didn't hear, but the bodies that were recovered had no clothes on, weren't in appearance alive when the aircraft was shot down and that that aircraft was squaking a military code on IFF. It appears this was a tailor made propaganda against the US. Now what sick government kills two hundred of its own citizens just to make someone else look bad?
When you hear of atrocities (I'm not saying the US hasn't committed any - nor that any other government/group hasn't felt justified in doing so) you have to consider how much is propaganda and how much is truth. Many countries, with a way of thought that we don't understand, will damage it's own citizenry for purposes of propaganda. The US has had considerable restraint in many of these instances. We could have rolled into Bagdad (sp?) during the Gulf War - we were close enough, but that was not our objective - our objective was to eject Iraqi troops from Kuwait. We did that.
Despite anything the US may have done in the past, anything that it may do in future, that does not justify the planning to kill 40,000+ innocent individuals. When I'm angry and pissed I don't go out and kill, the US government does not involve itself in world affairs out of some misguided notion of a god, rather tries to aid others and attempts to preserve its own interests. Yes, the US does have a right to act to preserve its own interests, just as an individual citizen has the right to act to preserve his/her own interests. Without such mentality it would be so much easier to let others walk all over you.
The US has made errors in policy, and that's coming back to bite us on the butt. That is not an excuse, should never be used as an excuse, for the type of devastation wreaked upon this nation and the world last Tuesday. We have a tendancy to want to lay blame - the only blame to be lain now is against those who sponsored the terrorism. They are the ones who chose to act instead of attempting to air their grievances in another fashion. They could have organized and protested peacefully - instead they chose to attempt the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent citizens and non-citizens inside the borders of the US.
He's YOUR god, they're YOUR rules, YOU burn in hell! |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
