You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: The 911 Tragedy
The issue i have with 9/11 is every year even in Australia its brought up and pasted everywhere and we're all meant to feel sympathy and pay homage to those who died. yet the U.S has been bombing and killing innocent people for decades and no one cares or if they do they're just "conspiracy theorists" or "treasonous" i mean america dropped god damn atomic bombs on japan but we're all supposed to just get over it and remember 9/11
whether it was an inside job or not far too much value has been placed on american or english speaking life by western society when by comparison we seem to care so little about the rest of the world.
Yeah, that's a valid point. Western life is seen as being more valuable, and that's not right.
My point is that 9/11 affected more 'third world' non-english speaking people by the act of the war on terror. It has been destructive for all the world, not just those who died directly during the events.
Millions have died as a result of the events of 9/11. Most of our military 'engagements' are due to this event.
"america dropped god damn atomic bombs on japan"
Who cares? Do you know what war is?
Man, those fucking Mongols...can you believe they raped, pillaged, and burned China? And we're supposed to just get over it?
lol you have basically 100% proved my point lexiconical. No one cares and thats the issue. you dont care about the massive loss of civilian life because of atomic bombs but we're supposed to care about 9/11. In the eyes of the terrorists that is also just "war". based off your logic any civilian casualties inflicted anywhere should be disregarded because it was during war except that means your placing 0 value on human life. and yea sure the mongols were bad too, as is every war in history. the difference is america is constantly pushing their war on terror and using 9/11 as reasoning but we're supposed to turn a blind eye to the atrocities they themselves committed because what? they're white? they speak english?
"we're supposed to care about 9/11."
I don't recall saying that. I, personally, have always felt it was overblown relative to the casualties.
"In the eyes of the terrorists that is also just "war"."
Yeah, except they are homicidal nutjobs that are just wrong. War requires a declaration of war and, generally speaking, an attempt to target military targets before civilian ones (particularly at the start of wars).
"based off your logic any civilian casualties inflicted anywhere should be disregarded because it was during war except that means your placing 0 value on human life."
I don't agree that this is the extension of my logic. Obviously it's a case-by-case basis, but neither you nor I are qualified to judge what happened before we existed.
Btw, civialians making bullets in factories aren't really civilians. Neither are civilians feeding the civilians making bullets. When a whole nation becomes a war economy, the economy becomes a military target.
"america is constantly pushing their war on terror and using 9/11 as reasoning"
I am one of the first to say that this is wrong, to the point where I am somewhat of an outcast in mainstream US circles.
"we're supposed to turn a blind eye to the atrocities they themselves committed"
I hope that you don't. Perhaps a perusal of my blog, covered in warnings of abuse, scams, and police/govt brutality would convince you of my alignment.
"they're white? they speak english?"
All irrelevant to me.
Interesting point about the Atom Bombs. Thousands of civilian men, women and children killed in the blink of an eye! No war crime tribunal to the victors of that war!
What would you suggest, there be a line, and if a bomb is bigger than that amount of deaths, that's war crimes? But, anything below that line, that's not war crimes?
Does giving the other party opportunity to surrender first matter? What if they are using suicide attackers, is that relevant?
Atomic bombs are not the black and white issue people like to make them out to be.
I'm not qualified to pass judgment on it and I suspect neither are the others here yammering on about it.
Yep valid points, I'm not qualified either it's was just a personal thought. Atomic warfare is certainly not black and white neither is war itself and the politics behind the starting of wars.
You know that saying 'All is fair in love and war'? I think there's probably some truth in that somewhere.
"'All is fair in love and war'"
I think this is a surprisingly good point, not the throwaway point it appears to be at first glance.
Ultimately, survival is a battle of what can be, not what should be. Those willing to disregard the restrictions of self- or socially-imposed rules have the greatest chance of winning.
It may not be optimal, but it's reality.
i like that saying as well.
All is fair in love and war, but in saying that its hypocritical of the united states and allies to condemn so harshly the 9/11 terror attacks.
Immortal technique has a great line in his song "bin laden"
"They say the rebels in Iraq still fight for Saddam
But that's bullshit, I'll show you why it's totally wrong
‘Cause if another country invaded the hood tonight
It'd be warfare through Harlem and Washington Heights
I wouldn't be fightin' for Bush or White America's dream
I'd be fightin' for my people's survival and self-esteem
I wouldn't fight for racist churches from the South, my nigga
I'd be fightin' to keep the occupation out, my nigga"
"All is fair in love and war, but in saying that its hypocritical of the united states and allies to condemn so harshly the 9/11 terror attacks."
This is a false equivalency. Two national powers with a formally declared state of war exchanging bombs with primarily military targets is one thing.
Terrorists acting against the interests and (at least public) orders of their governments to attack exclusively civilians alone is another.
If terrorists wanted to play this card, they should have targeted Monsanto, or maybe Congress...not some random bankers and buristas.