"ya joe! me sucky sucky. ruv you rong time."
Thoughts on 9/11
- Thread starter Dirt rider
- Start date
That IS how they speak there right?
Speaking of this, I had to write an essay for history. here it is.
Dear grandson, 9/11 was the day when the Al-Qaeda sent out 19 hijackers with 4 teams to take over 4 airplanes, both having a skilled pilot. Two planes (United Airlines 175 and American Airlines 11) crashed into The World Trade Center in New York City. The other two planes crashing into the Pentagon in Arlington Virginia and the other in in Shankesville Pennsylvania. Nearly 3000 people died on 9/11. It was a day to remember.
It affected our Nation and many other nations tremendeously. It brought everyone in America closer together. Before the attacks there was many American flags hanging outside houses, after 9/11 the flags outside these house increased at a fast rate, many stores even ran out of them. This shows that we really are "Proud to be Americans".
Now grandson, I have a total different perception on this day. I believe many Americans take forgranted what we have in our lives here. None of them take in that we have never actually had a great attack in our nation. On December 7 1941, the Japan destroyed 12 of our ships and 188 aircraft. In this attack nearly 2400 Americans died. Correct me if I'm wrong but on August 6, 1945 the United States Airforce dropped the bomb "Little Boy" on the city of Hiroshima, they dropped a second bomb named "Fat Man" on Nagasaki during World War 2. We had a huge fit over the attack on Pearl Harbor, but when we go and drop two, yes, two atomic bombs on Japan we have no conscience about it.
In this bombing we, Americans, killed 140,000 in Hiroshima, and 74,000 in Nagaski. Please, look at the difference. We killed 214,000 and they attacked us and killed 1400 and destroyed 12 ships and 188 aircraft. I don't know about you but I believe in an eye for an eye. We killed nearly 89 times as many people in our bombings, that and ruined the land with radiation.
On 9/11, only a couple days later we launched the War on Terrorism. In this war, just in 2003 we killed nearly 69,000 just from 9/11 2001 to 2003. We are still, to this day killing people, just carelessly taking their lives away. The United States is one big hippicrit. We think life is something precious, but we go and kill millions of other countrys, and when another country attacks us and they don't nearly kill as many as we have, we have statues and memorials built. That's not something you want to remember, do you think the Japanese wanted to build memorials to the fact that we killed nearly 214,000 of their people, no! We are a selfious, ignorant, sad, and thoughtless.
Dear grandson, 9/11 was the day when the Al-Qaeda sent out 19 hijackers with 4 teams to take over 4 airplanes, both having a skilled pilot. Two planes (United Airlines 175 and American Airlines 11) crashed into The World Trade Center in New York City. The other two planes crashing into the Pentagon in Arlington Virginia and the other in in Shankesville Pennsylvania. Nearly 3000 people died on 9/11. It was a day to remember.
It affected our Nation and many other nations tremendeously. It brought everyone in America closer together. Before the attacks there was many American flags hanging outside houses, after 9/11 the flags outside these house increased at a fast rate, many stores even ran out of them. This shows that we really are "Proud to be Americans".
Now grandson, I have a total different perception on this day. I believe many Americans take forgranted what we have in our lives here. None of them take in that we have never actually had a great attack in our nation. On December 7 1941, the Japan destroyed 12 of our ships and 188 aircraft. In this attack nearly 2400 Americans died. Correct me if I'm wrong but on August 6, 1945 the United States Airforce dropped the bomb "Little Boy" on the city of Hiroshima, they dropped a second bomb named "Fat Man" on Nagasaki during World War 2. We had a huge fit over the attack on Pearl Harbor, but when we go and drop two, yes, two atomic bombs on Japan we have no conscience about it.
In this bombing we, Americans, killed 140,000 in Hiroshima, and 74,000 in Nagaski. Please, look at the difference. We killed 214,000 and they attacked us and killed 1400 and destroyed 12 ships and 188 aircraft. I don't know about you but I believe in an eye for an eye. We killed nearly 89 times as many people in our bombings, that and ruined the land with radiation.
On 9/11, only a couple days later we launched the War on Terrorism. In this war, just in 2003 we killed nearly 69,000 just from 9/11 2001 to 2003. We are still, to this day killing people, just carelessly taking their lives away. The United States is one big hippicrit. We think life is something precious, but we go and kill millions of other countrys, and when another country attacks us and they don't nearly kill as many as we have, we have statues and memorials built. That's not something you want to remember, do you think the Japanese wanted to build memorials to the fact that we killed nearly 214,000 of their people, no! We are a selfious, ignorant, sad, and thoughtless.
I hope you haven't handed that in yet because gazing into my crystal I see red slashes all over the place with at the top "C minus- use spell check".
How about in big red letters, "Emergency Toilet Paper".
Actually I heard hes had facial reconstructive surgery and is now enjoying honest pay as a journeyman level trench digger for his fathers multi-billion dollar construction company.
Key phrase, and you are right; there are plenty of folks who isolate themselves in what we call "the bubble" of the base. I call them dumba$$es. You are being paid to live in a foreign country, and you are stupid if you dont get out and live a bit around. You didnt hang about in one place with your buds from Oz your first go abroad, right?
Also, if you dont meet some local types on base, you just arent trying. All US bases have quotas of locals that have to be employed on board, it just makes sense.
But anyway, I was really just objecting to MMikes blanket statement on a subject he apparently knows little to nothing about. He is genuinely a Peckerwood.
Yeah yeah I know, I don't have any of that fancy crap on my laptop. I didn't go through and reread it before I posted it. I went back and made all the corrections. Wasn't as much as spell check as using words correctly.
I wasn't so conserned with duh spellin and grammer, but it was duh content that conserned me.
Seriously though, do you know your teacher's attitudes on the subject? I personally have had bad experiences with telling the truth, especially when it is not politically correct. I forsee a bad outcome if you actually turn that in. Try not to get expelled.
don't be so hard on the beaver [american joke]; i think he should turn it in just as it is.
Good sentiment though. Can't fault that.
And wouldn't you think that the smart money would be on N8 being one of those dumbasses?
Well that ain't news...but I still don't think the military counts as LIVING abroad. You're still going home at night. It can count as TRAVELLING...but not actually LIVING.
I lived in Mexico....for a week....at a Club Med. It was awesome.
This Blog here has a pretty good summing up I find.
The Valerie Plame link is quite an interesting read too.
I liked it, it put perspective on a subject which all to often lack it. But Rick might be right about thinking about your grades, dunno. I would give it a thought if your teacher is a nut and you think it might ruin all efforts you put in that class. On personal experience I was arguing with my teacher about the Bosnian conflict while that was hot. I put him to the corner by greater knowledge in that subject while he refused to listen to logical facts, typical case of brainwash, but he still gave me a good grade. So it doesn't have to mean you're gonna hang for expressing your view.
Thanks DaveW. That was an interesting read. I especially enjoyed the conclusion:
A lot of the the oil rich nations of the Middle East have a trillion dollars, but chose to spend it on other than peaceful infrastructure.
Yeah, but those are evil Islamofascist governments. Obviously, they would spend none of it on anything but WMD.
I know this is crazy talk, but what if instead of the US spending a trillion on bombs and death, instead it was spent on education, infrastructure, food, etc. You know, maybe try killing 'em with kindness?
That kind of idea is simply
!The American taxpayers would NEVER support that!
Does anyone remember the "I look forward to the day when schools have everything they need and the Air Force has to hold a bake sale to buy a bomber" bumper stickers?
and just what do you think KBR [halliburton sub] is doing over there? [besides keeping the baby killers fattened & armed, of course] i find it hard to believe that we supported the iraqi nat'l conress [now defunct i believe] & now support the current parliament in gesture only.
but i see your greater point: felafels, not field artillery; madrasas, not morters, and don't forget oil pipelines so we can finally collect our spoils.
And I hope that your teacher assigns you some extra work on the "Greater East Asia Co Prosperity Sphere" or perhaps the rape of Nanking, or the razing of Singapore. Bataan death march? Maybe even the firebombing of Dresden, just to keep things even. Yes,the bombs were horrible, hideous and possibly unneccesary, but in the end they may be responsible for your existence. Have a Grandfather who fought in WW2? If we had gone into mainland Japan, he may have died, thusly eliminating your existence. What a shame that would have been...
Have a look at this if you still think the Japanes were undeserving...
http://www.ww2pacific.com/atrocity.html
How many countries in the world have nuclear weapons? How many of those countries have used them against another country? What threat did the corner fish market in Nagasaki pose to the American way of life?
only we had them then (10 or so now belong to the nukular club)
we have the sole distinction, obviously, of using them against a populous
the threat against our way of life was grave & imminent; what would now be called a "slam dunk"
"Adam Bogacki drew my attention to this astonishing essay from the Armed Forces Journal:This Blog here has a pretty good summing up I find.
The Valerie Plame link is quite an interesting read too.
Maj. Peters, formerly assigned to the Office of the Deputy Chief of Staff for Intelligence where he was responsible for future warfare, candidly outlines how the map of the Middle East should be fundamentally re-drawn, in a new imperial endeavour designed to correct past errors. "Without such major boundary revisions, we shall never see a more peaceful Middle East," he observes, but then adds wryly: "Oh, and one other dirty little secret from 5,000 years of history: Ethnic cleansing works."

Thus, acknowledging that the sweeping reconfiguration of borders he proposes would necessarily involve massive ethnic cleansing and accompanying bloodshed on perhaps a genocidal scale, he insists that unless it is implemented, "we may take it as an article of faith that a portion of the bloodshed in the region will continue to be our own.""
I don't even want to comment on that.
A lot of security work. Building bases. Overcharging the US taxpayer.
Actually, most of the infrastructure work is targetting oil, with the claim that it will allow the country to financ it's own hospitals and schools. The reality is very very different as has been proven time and time again in other developing countries. Read "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" when you get a chance. We rebuilt Japan and Germany properly because of the scrutiny and oversight of the UN (and they were fortunate enough to have homogenous populations and no major natural resources). Pretty much everything we've ever had sole control over, we've abused.
this reads like you are not happy with the given timeline & all its revisions, and are then left to believe this effort has been shelved indefinitely. time will tell.
with the laughable indorsement of the morally bankrupt & toothless UN aside, where else have we had "sole control over"? and where did you get that germany didn't have any major natural resources? according to CIA factbook, they have coal, lignite, natural gas, iron ore, copper, nickel, uranium, potash, salt, construction materials, timber, arable land sufficient to cripple its economy if removed.
japan has fish, volcanoes, bukkake & dirty underwear in vending machines.
The UN was a different institution at the time, and there was true coalition oversight of the rebuild efforts. I don't claim that's possible or realistic with the current conflict/UN/international relations. I'm just pointing out why it worked then.
Yes, I'm not happy with the timeline, nor do I trust that it will achieve it's goals. I feel fairly confident that the funds will be funnelled to a select elite (including back into the US) and never make it to the broader population.
See venezuela, columbia, ecuador, panama, malaysia, philippines... shall I continue?
Which of those did our economy desperately rely on on not have sufficient alternative source for at the time?
oh snap, i forgot this $-quote:
i don't see panama as "abused" with that pesky canal, phillipines being freed from the spanish as "abused", venezuela as "abused" b/c citgo is ubiquitous in the u.s. i cannot speak to the rest in your list, but will admit curiousity as to the extent of this abuse; got a cliff's notes version handy?
as for your comment on germany, i am left to believe your point of view is that if it weren't for their lack of resources so necessary in our economy, & the UN (or league of nations, if you like), we would have unleashed a torrent of land-rape reminiscent of ghengis khan.
how would you then relate that to italy & france & our efforts to rebuild those countries [hint: it was a little north of trivial]? your point of view seems rather selective to what can make us look like the proverbial bull in a china shop, and your statement "every thing we have sole control over we have abused" is defeatist, hopeless, jaded, cynical, and negates all our effort after ww2, and further negates the lack of contributions from mother russia & other enemies-of-our-enemies [unless we count systematic genocide from the crushing oppression of communism, but i digress].
that you fail to qualify your statements with any mention of our benevolence over the generations is pretty revealing as to where you affix your gaze. i expect this from le monde reading, euro-trash, "black is my favorite color", 30 hr/week working, "the red balloon" watching "sophisticates".
if i've mischaracterized or misread your posts, please re-align me. no, i'm not menstruating
yeah, i guess we should give hitler a standing-O for handling that "dirty jew" problem. and i'll assume we both know japan's rich history of racism & other subjugation (not to excuse our own, let's just not make them the battered wife just yet)Ohio said:
with this, i agree 100% iraq will be like any other oil-rich arab nation & we in turn will still not have exclusive oil-rights, nor a pipeline replentishing mcmurdo field.Ohio said:
i don't see panama as "abused" with that pesky canal, phillipines being freed from the spanish as "abused", venezuela as "abused" b/c citgo is ubiquitous in the u.s. i cannot speak to the rest in your list, but will admit curiousity as to the extent of this abuse; got a cliff's notes version handy?
as for your comment on germany, i am left to believe your point of view is that if it weren't for their lack of resources so necessary in our economy, & the UN (or league of nations, if you like), we would have unleashed a torrent of land-rape reminiscent of ghengis khan.
how would you then relate that to italy & france & our efforts to rebuild those countries [hint: it was a little north of trivial]? your point of view seems rather selective to what can make us look like the proverbial bull in a china shop, and your statement "every thing we have sole control over we have abused" is defeatist, hopeless, jaded, cynical, and negates all our effort after ww2, and further negates the lack of contributions from mother russia & other enemies-of-our-enemies [unless we count systematic genocide from the crushing oppression of communism, but i digress].
that you fail to qualify your statements with any mention of our benevolence over the generations is pretty revealing as to where you affix your gaze. i expect this from le monde reading, euro-trash, "black is my favorite color", 30 hr/week working, "the red balloon" watching "sophisticates".
if i've mischaracterized or misread your posts, please re-align me. no, i'm not menstruating
Alot of those countries you mentioned have stong Islamic groups in em, no thanks! Hong Kong? Maybe China 1 day will decide to sail over their way and overtake it again. The best thing about this country is being able to do things, being able to make money and being able to leave it at anytime. Its funny how so many people want to move here from other countries and there are alot over here that feel the smae way. THE GRASS IS ALWAYS GREENER ON THE OTHER SIDE.
Obviously, I'm not crediting Hitler with Germany's post WWII success. I'm pointing out the the challenges were fewer culturally in Germany and Japan than in Iraq. Did I really need to explain that to you?
Again, read Confessions. It's short, factual, and written in (painfully) simple language. As Cliff's Notes as it gets...
I think we all accept the League of Nations was a failure. I think it was a combination of that lesson being readily apparent, and the oversight provided by a coalition of the allied forces that ensured the rebuild effort was forward thinking and fair. Yes, had we not had the benefit of just enduring a war that resulted partly from greed (oppressive restittution), and several other countries looking on, I think we would have raped Germany. Then again, they're pretty white, so maybe we wouldn't have.
I lump Itay in with our efforts in Germany, and France with England... besides aid to allies is a completely different situation.
Show me the exceptions that I failed to select.
I don't think I ever claimed that others contributed more, or more altruistically. If so, please point it out. Or you could just make up outrageous statements and pretend to argue against those. Seems to work pretty well...
Please, offer counter-examples of this benevolence.
Good thing you're not arguing with one of those, or you'd know what to expect.
Are you new? You won't get an answer......
he's like bush...he can just make crap come out of his mouth w/ no way to back it up, and he doesn't even try.
I like the way Lewis Black puts it:
so perhaps we should step back for a while - even take murtha's recommendation to re-deploy to okinawa - as to better assure our success. i'm only half-kidding
after reading a few excerpts from amazon, it's on my wish list. you might also enjoy Overthrow: America's Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq (i was actually watching booktv & this was featured - i don't ride in the rain) also, i greatly enjoyed freakanomics, and it shaped my thinking noticeably.
should've clearcut the schwarzwald when we had the chance
this is simply an intractable demand. your statement painted the u.s. with too broad a brush, as i could've done if i stuck a flag up my ass & farted "hail to the chief"
i won't make up outrageous statements when yours will suffice; again, i am not convinced we have whatever the opposite of the midas touch is
we both know our country hasn't been administered by the boy scouts. this doesn't exactly put us on par w/ the khmer rouge.
let's walk the cat back, shall we?
I'm not sure what's more disturbing... your exploitation of the 9/11 tragedy or misrepresentation of the facts.
We didn't drop the atomic bomb on Japan simply in retaliation for Pearl Harbor, so trying to compare casualties as if they are directly related is outrageous.
We didn't go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan simply because of 9/11 either.
Also, I consider it misguided to claim that the United States is directly responsible for the 69,000 casualties in the "War on Terror". The majority of the casualties as reported by the media includes deaths caused by the terrorists... (car bombs, etc...) Are you not able to see the distinction? Harry Truman knew full well that his one decision would end the lives of tens of thousands of people. This is a far cry from our current tactics, where very rarely are civilians intentionally targeted. So if you want to play the comparison game, President Truman is 89 times worse than President Bush right? Sounds like you need to be angry at your grandfather's generation 89 times more than ours too.
I hope that one day you are able to view the tragedy of 9/11 at its most basic level, without all the confusion.
Agree, but don't forget that every effort was put in to rebuild West Germany to stand as a role model for capitalism, as it also was viewed, to be compared directly against its devided half.
That was some good isht!
The reasons for dropping them bombs had little to do with saving the lives of US soldiers. They were mostly to show the world who's got the wallet that says "bad motherfokker" onnit. Afghanistan was for no wellmeaning reasons eather.
The sectarian killings and everything else that has happened in Iraq and Afghanistan is because of the coalitions wars. The missery that comes with war is waay greater than just those that die by the bullets of the agressor.
That civilians aren't intentionally targeted is just a change in rethorics, compared to WWII, because it's no longer considered to be politcaly correct, and actaly is a criminal act. At best 9/11 has been exploited by the current administration and its allies for their personal economical gain and hunger for power. At worst they are the ones that staged the whole thing for the same reasons.
I think it's people like you who can't understand cause and effect actually.