The Twin Towers

bloggs · 08-09-2003 1:25pm #1

What do you think should (as the current idea may be changed) replace the fallen Twin Towers?

I think they should rebuild them as they were, it could work as a symbol to the terrorists that the people of NY were able to get over the attack an get on with their lives. Perhaps have a monument inside each fo the buildings?

mr_angry · 08-09-2003 1:30pm

I think they should build some kind of memorial monument to the innocent people that died, rather than another monument to the financial power of the US. Either that, or they should leave it the way it is - a constant reminder never to become complacent again.

Wook · 08-09-2003 1:34pm

why not the real american symbol ? MC-donalds HQ ?

spongebob · 08-09-2003 1:41pm

Originally posted by bloggs
What do you think should (as the current idea may be changed) replace the fallen Twin Towers?

This is not a political discussion, try it in humanities instead.

Victor · 08-09-2003 1:42pm

I think this thread has been gone over about a half dozen times.

Originally posted by bloggs
I think they should rebuild them as they were, it could work as a symbol to the terrorists that the people of NY were able to get over the attack an get on with their lives.

And something for terrorists to knock down again - they design was flawed from day 1 (it was capable of withstanding a strike froma boeing 707, but not the consequent fire, there are now many bigger aircraft, carrying more fuel) :rolleyes:

mr_angry · 08-09-2003 1:44pm

Lets face it, the World Trade Centre was picked on by the terrorists because it represented the financial power of the West over some of the dirt-poor countries that are breeding grounds for this kind of activity. Building another one will just make it a target once again.

I don't mean to blame the US for anything that happened on September 11th, but they don't seem to realise WHY this happened.

bonkey · 08-09-2003 2:47pm

Originally posted by Muck
This is not a political discussion, try it in humanities instead.

You are not a moderator. Try not moderating.

jc

spongebob · 08-09-2003 3:32pm

Lets erect something or else fill the hole in in case someopne trips and falls into it !

JustHalf · 08-09-2003 5:07pm

This I reckon:

Daniel Libdeskind won the competition. There are more pictures.

Éomer of Rohan · 08-09-2003 9:54pm

No matter what they build, if it is a defiant statement, I swear I hope the terrorists knock it the hell down again. The Twin Trade Towers were an emblem of US triumphalism and I damn sure am going to blame the US for bringing the events of September 11th on themselves.

I celebrate the 11th of September as the day that crass US imperialism was revealed, in 1973. Once again, in 2001, it became the day that began the revelation for a new generation of exactly what the US is capable of, not to mention what our own media is capable of. I specifically mean the present situation in Afghanistan where there are ten thousand US troops and the Taliban are regrouping - there last week, two US soldiers were gunned down and there was hardly a blip. The arrogance of the US dictates that attention is focussed on the dispute that it is actually doing something about, whether what it is doing is right or wrong.

gandalf · 08-09-2003 10:36pm

Éomer that has to be one of the most pathetic posts I have seen on boards in quite a while. There is no way I would wish a horrible incident like that on any nation on this earth again, no matter what the policies and actions of their government. Sure US foreign policy has caused death and grief across quite a number of nations on this planet but did the ordinary people who were going on about their daily lives in those towers deserve those deaths ??

If you represent what Communism stood for then thank god it is dead as a political system!!!

Getting back on topic I think they should put something back in its place and I think the winning design would be an excellent choice.

Gandalf.

bonkey · 09-09-2003 8:10am

If they're gonna insist on building something (I'd favour a park with no major structures), then I like the winning solution.

Whats depressing is that I heard on the radio today that some of the steel from teh WTC will be used to clad the front of a warship "to show the continuing resolve".

Way to go....

jc

(p.s. I'm still hoping I mistranslated teh news report)

09-09-2003 8:25am

There was a discussion on Newsnight on BBC2 the other night.
They were reckoning that with $7 billion( it could have been $17 billion) from the insurance fund, that the owner of the site had plenty of money to do what ever he wanted and that was likely to be what makes the most money, which included ignoring any winning design.

mm

bloggs · 09-09-2003 8:34am

Originally posted by JustHalf
This I reckon:

Daniel Libdeskind won the competition. There are more pictures.

I think this is the most ugly of the designs. Looks like somethign a four year old would create

Some of the others were great i think.

Bloody hell Eomer!!!! Will you please take that back and apologise for anyone who was offended, i didn't have any family where killed in the attack but a friend of mine did, and he would be very angry to think the there would be Irish people who would praise the likes of Bin Laden.

Jaden · 09-09-2003 9:20am

What did Bin Laden do?

If OJ can get off, I'm pretty sure they could never convict Osama.

This is just one of these things that depress me about the modern world, and it's reliance on mainstream news reporting. The central idea is, that if you repeat a statement often enough, it becomes fact.

I have never seen credible evidence linking Osama to any part of the planning or execution of this atrocity.

He is after all innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

Isn't he???

Éomer of Rohan · 09-09-2003 10:45am

Bloggs, I will not take it back at all. America had it coming; Bin Laden, IF it was Bin Laden, attacked a viable economic target and was aiming at other targets which in a war are viable; military and governmental.

America brought it on themselves, simple as that. People continually say that it was a religious attack - but even the American's own report on 'the causes of terrorism' set one of the major causes at the door of economic problems - and I fully believe that the economic problems of the lesser developed world are deliberately caused by the Western world, especially and more than any other single power, the United States both through structural adjustment programs (via the WTO!!!) and through the MNE's that go after the indigenous resources of LDCs.

Nowhere in what I said earlier praised Bin Laden - he's a fundamentalist muslim willing to exploit the hate created in Muslim societies by the exploitation of the West - I'm not a fundamentalist muslim and therefore our outlooks differ.

And as for Gandalf's churlish comment about if this being what communism is...blah blah blah, get a hold of yourself please and kindly credit me with being more than the automatons you people seem to think communism will mass produce. That is to say, I'm entitled to hold my own views without socialist ideology entering in to it; what I said was an opinion based on the realities of the world, NOT how socialists would solve the problem.

Victor · 09-09-2003 11:56am

Originally posted by Man
There was a discussion on Newsnight on BBC2 the other night.
They were reckoning that with $7 billion( it could have been $17 billion) from the insurance fund, that the owner of the site had plenty of money to do what ever he wanted and that was likely to be what makes the most money, which included ignoring any winning design.

The site is owned by the Port Authority. I'm not sure if the lease on the actual buildings is current. Somwthing says frustration of contract and force majure to me.

gandalf · 09-09-2003 12:29pm

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
And as for Gandalf's churlish comment about if this being what communism is...blah blah blah, get a hold of yourself please and kindly credit me with being more than the automatons you people seem to think communism will mass produce. That is to say, I'm entitled to hold my own views without socialist ideology entering in to it; what I said was an opinion based on the realities of the world, NOT how socialists would solve the problem.

Sorry Eomer I don't credit you with anything at all, as far as I am concerned you are nothing but a little boy trying to look smart. You are the first to complain to the moderators on this board when there is a sniff of anything that doesn't agree with your views in discussions and then you get all huffy because I expressed my view that you with your pathetic little attempts at trying to be sensational are giving Communism (which you proport to be a supporter of) a bad name.

So Eomer here are a few questions for you, did you agree with the attack on September the 11th 2001 and were you happy with the bodycount ?

Gandalf.

Éomer of Rohan · 09-09-2003 12:57pm

Quoted from Gandalf
Sorry Eomer I don't credit you with anything at all, as far as I am concerned you are nothing but a little boy trying to look smart

I do believe that that comment contravenes the rules.

Quoted from Gandalf
You are the first to complain to the moderators on this board when there is a sniff of anything that doesn't agree with your views in discussions

The only times I complain are when there is something in a post that is out of line; ie a direct attack on a poster or overt and denigrating, not to mention unfounded, attacks on ideas. Again, your comments are out of line.

Quoted from Gandalf
all huffy because I expressed my view that you with your pathetic little attempts at trying to be sensational

Hardly sensational; if you paid any attention to what goes on on these boards, you would remember that for about three months Sand posted with a comment of mine saying almost the same thing in his signature, not to mention the numerous previous discussions in which I have defended precisely what I said above.

Quoted from Gandalf
are giving Communism (which you proport to be a supporter of) a bad name

I really love the hypocrisy of these boards. I purport to be a supporter of communism now is that it? Funny that since in every other argument on political ideology that goes on, my posts get attacked for being socialist. Please re-read what I said previously regarding this.

Quoted from Gandalf
So Eomer here are a few questions for you, did you agree with the attack on September the 11th 2001 and were you happy with the bodycount ?

Was I happy with the bodycount? No. I do not like death, even of the guilty. Did I agree with the attack on the Pentagon? Absolutely. Did I agree with the attempted attack on the white house/capitol hill? Absolutely. Did I agree with the attack on the TTTs? Yes, though not for the same reasons as Bin Laden.

The fact is that imperialist power of any sort needs to be stopped and America is the number one imperialist power. The American willingness to resort to arms means that the method to halt this will probably be force - to acknowledge a probable necessity does not mean I have to like it.

No country can free itself from capitalism unless it allows the US economic interests to screw the country over worse than before; otherwise it finds an American fleet or an American-backed army at the doorstep very quickly. America bribes, bombs, lays seige to and starves nations that disagree with it's policies and speaking as someone who disagrees with almost every policy of the USA since the 19th Century, I feel that anything that will halt US interference in the sovereign affairs of other nations is welcome.

Understand however that this is not exclusive to America; America is just the prime exponent of these right-wing ideals - if it were not America that was doing these things, it would be some other nation in the forefront, just as it was Spain and Portugal of the 1500's France of the 1600's, Britain from the 1700's to the end of the colonial era.

Victor · 09-09-2003 2:15pm

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
Did I agree with the attack on the Pentagon? Absolutely.

Even using civilians as the weapon?

SkepticOne · 09-09-2003 2:18pm

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
No matter what they build, if it is a defiant statement, I swear...

Like this one?

Wook · 09-09-2003 2:29pm

as i said before , build a MC-donalds on this ground, see if they like it. ( they do it everywhere else , so what different about this one?)

LegacyUser · 09-09-2003 2:38pm

Originally posted by Wook
as i said before , build a MC-donalds on this ground, see if they like it. ( they do it everywhere else , so what different about this one?)

they could have new specialties like twin happy meals

ArphaRima · 09-09-2003 2:54pm

I dislike American Foreign policy. Intensely.
I hate the fact that Americans dont care about it. Even now. And its getting worse.

But the cutting of flight attendant's throats, pilot's throats; that stark message to the passengers of aircraft that they are going to die... 3000 people killed in one day from 4 attacks. 1 failed. 2 on Twin towers. 1 on Pentagon. That is not justice. That is a massacre.

Yes, the pentagon is a valid target - Military.
The white house too maybe - Political/Military Leadership.

Twin Towers. NO.

Aircraft used. NO.

Yes there is a link between American foreign policy, the military and wall street. Each drives the other.

September 11th did not change the world. It changed America.
Now they are looking for an enemy they cant fight, and their president is putting every excuse for a war in their path.

fisty · 09-09-2003 3:04pm

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
America bribes, bombs, lays seige to and starves nations that disagree with it's policies and speaking as someone who disagrees with almost every policy of the USA since the 19th Century, I feel that anything that will halt US interference in the sovereign affairs of other nations is welcome.

What about world war two, America helped your commie mates and britain fight back facism, did you disagree with that?

ringzer · 09-09-2003 3:47pm

Of the people who have posted on this topic, how many have actually visited ground zero and read the stories of people who have survived and not? How about reading the transcripts of the calls made to emergency services from people stuck up in the towers? Has anyone actually thought about it for one second? What would you do if you were in that situation?

I was stuck in the blackout here in NY a few weeks ago. It was pretty chaotic, with everyone thinking another attack was taking place. I can only imagine what it was like to be in NY on that day.

I suppose its fairly easy to be distant from the actual death and destruction of it all when you're in Ireland. But come over here and hear some real life stories, and I dont think you'll be as quick to wish another such attack on any country, especially America.

As for the main topic, I agree with the winning design. It combines office space and memorials in a very good way.

LegacyUser · 09-09-2003 3:56pm

Originally posted by ringzer
Of the people who have posted on this topic, how many have actually visited ground zero

'ground zero', The site directly below, directly above, or at the point of detonation of a nuclear weapon.

Nagasaki - Hiroshima

nick_riviera · 09-09-2003 3:58pm

I do not like death, even of the guilty.

Thats a pretty twisted world view.What were those in the twin towers guilty of?Of going to work too early?If the people in the WTC are legitimate targets,then surely so are the rest of us.

Of course to extremists of any flavour(fascists,religious fundamentalists,communists),the ends always justify the means,and human life is expendable.

Getting back to the topic at hand,the twin towers covered quite an area of land.It would be best to construct something which would bring people and businesses back into the area,as well as having an appropriate memorial.

ArphaRima · 09-09-2003 4:08pm

Of the people who have posted on this topic, how many have actually visited ground zero and read the stories of people who have survived and not? How about reading the transcripts of the calls made to emergency services from people stuck up in the towers? Has anyone actually thought about it for one second?

I have. For all answers.

What would you do if you were in that situation

Like a lot of the people in that situation. I probably would have died.

Please do not justify ANY of the current wars by sympathy for September 11th 2001 (and it's not 9-1-1).

I dont think you'll be as quick to wish another such attack on any country

One of Americas first actions was to go to war. Then again. To war.

A Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States' Aerial Bombing of Afghanistan: A Comprehensive Accounting - The minimum number of casualties amounts to more than 3,500

ringzer · 09-09-2003 4:23pm

Originally posted by bananayoghurt
'ground zero', The site directly below, directly above, or at the point of detonation of a nuclear weapon.

Nagasaki - Hiroshima

Ok, smartass, if you dont have anything useful to add to this topic, then dont bother. Ground Zero is the commonly known phrase used to describe the World Trade Center. I'm just merely using the language used by millions others, I didnt invent it, so dont go quoting dictionary definitions of the phrase to me.

Also, what are all these comments about the wars afterwards? I made no reference to the actions taken by the US government in response to 9/11. I was simply reminding people of the immense human tragedy that took place there, thats all. Nothing else.

ArphaRima · 09-09-2003 4:26pm

Also, what are all these comments about the wars afterwards? I made no reference to the actions taken by the US government in response to 9/11. I was simply reminding people of the immense human tragedy that took place there, thats all. Nothing else.

I was simply reminding people of the immense human tragedy that took place after September 11th 2001, thats all. Nothing else.

ringzer · 09-09-2003 4:28pm

Originally posted by fluffer
I was simply reminding people of the immense human tragedy that took place after September 11th 2001, thats all. Nothing else.

Another smartass, great!

ArphaRima · 09-09-2003 4:40pm

Smartass?!

Listen. You havent argued a single valid point yet.
September 11th was an immense human tragedy. You said that. I agree. What makes 3,500 Afghan or 6200 Iraqi civilians (both minimum figures) killed by Americans less of a tragedy?

I suppose its fairly easy to be distant from the actual death and destruction of it all when you're in Ireland.

Unlike many Americans, we tend to follow the news.
I guess Americans feel pretty distant to the bombs that fall from their military machine...

Victor · 09-09-2003 5:30pm

Originally posted by ringzer
I suppose its fairly easy to be distant from the actual death and destruction of it all when you're in Ireland.

Except when it was republican violence being sponsored from New York and Boston.

bonkey · 09-09-2003 5:58pm

ringzer....

less of the personal attacks please. If you're unsure why read the rules.

fluffer....

you sound like you're pretty close to retaliating to said personal insults (cause you're sounding a bit riled there). Take my advice and don't.

[/b]bananayoghurt.....[/b]

pedanticism is all well and good when there's a point to it. I fail to see one in your "ground zero" comment. Are you actually trying to make a point, or just distract others from the actual discussion?

jc

LegacyUser · 09-09-2003 6:01pm

Originally posted by ringzer
Ok, smartass, if you dont have anything useful to add to this topic, then dont bother. .

it is usefull, shows the mindset of all those American's, happy to inflict Nuclear Holocaust on two cities (and justify it, doubt you'll ever hear any kind of apology from Mr Bush for that or any other war crimes perpetrated by him and his ilk )then blubber when two office blocks get knocked down,

Yea, it was a terrible thing, but its hard to have sympathy for them when their armies are laying waste where ever they please,

terrorists my arse, any Iraqi who bags himself an enemy soldier who invaded and blew the crap out of his country gets a big thumbs up from me,

Sand · 09-09-2003 9:25pm

Hardly sensational; if you paid any attention to what goes on on these boards, you would remember that for about three months Sand posted with a comment of mine saying almost the same thing in his signature, not to mention the numerous previous discussions in which I have defended precisely what I said above.

You imply youre happy to defend your views but when I placed a few quotes of yours in my sig as you noted - you ended up going to Devore upset by the fact that I thought your views worthy of my sig. Clearly saying you hoped Bin Laden came back and finished the job on the US didnt sound so good in retrospect:)

Seeing as youre happy to defend your views will you go to Devore again if I were to quote you again in my sig?

I was thinking of using

No matter what they build, if it is a defiant statement, I swear I hope the terrorists knock it the hell down again. The Twin Trade Towers were an emblem of US triumphalism and I damn sure am going to blame the US for bringing the events of September 11th on themselves.

as im getting a bit tired of my current sig. Please let me use it as a sig as youre a great man for the memorable quotes, and Ive found it hard to replace the 2 or 3 of yours I was using previously.

Éomer of Rohan · 09-09-2003 11:23pm

Sure Sand - that one is fine as a matter of fact; the ones that I had a problem with were ones that people seemed to take out of context every time you posted in the same discussion as I did.

Éomer of Rohan · 09-09-2003 11:28pm

Quoted from Fisty
What about world war two, America helped your commie mates and britain fight back facism, did you disagree with that?

America went to war to prevent herself being isolated on the world stage - out of selfish strategic interest; nothing more. Actually, there a few commentators around who believe that it was banking interests in Europe that tipped the Americans in favour of war....let's not forget, America did not declare war on Germany - it was the other way around. America sat happily on her laurels while the British and French suffered horrible casualties and then, after squeezing the British for all they were worth, still held off.

Éomer of Rohan · 09-09-2003 11:30pm

Quoted from Bananayoghurt
terrorists my arse, any Iraqi who bags himself an enemy soldier who invaded and blew the crap out of his country gets a big thumbs up from me

Abso-fricking-lutely.

Xhen · 10-09-2003 3:24am

Eomer of Rohan, I despise the fact that you hijacked an honorable name from Tolkien's book that you're not worthy of and I have nothing but contempt for your reprehensible ideology. If your cheerleading for murderous terrorists is any example then Europe is sinking into an amoral, nihilistic morass that will destroy it if the fascists from al Qaeda don't get there first.

Christopher Hitchens has this to say about you and your ilk:

If our Congress or our executive mansion had been immolated that morning, would some people still be talking as if there was a moral equivalence between the United States and the Taliban? Would they still be prattling as if the whole thing was an oblique revenge for the Florida recount? Of course they would. They don’t know any other way to talk or think. My second-strongest memory of that week is still the moaning and bleating and jeering of the “left.” Reflect upon it: Civil society is assaulted in the most criminal way by the most pitilessly reactionary force in the modern world. The drama immediately puts the working class in the saddle as the necessary actor and rescuer of the said society. Investigation shows the complicity of a chain of conservative client states, from Pakistan to Saudi Arabia, in the face of which our vaunted “national security” czars had capitulated.
Here was the time for radicals to have demanded a war to the utmost against the forces of reaction, as well a full house cleaning of the state apparatus and a league of solidarity with the women of Afghanistan and with the whole nexus of dissent and opposition in the Muslim world. Instead of which, the posturing loons all concentrated on a masturbatory introspection about American guilt, granted the aura of revolutionary authenticity to bin Laden and his fellow gangsters, and let the flag be duly seized by those who did look at least as if they meant business.

Let me take the strongest objection to my interpretation, which is that the events of Sept. 11, 2001, were exploited by conservatives to settle accounts with Saddam Hussein and that many Americans have been fooled into war by thinking that Iraq was behind the attacks. Leave aside the glaring and germane fact that Saddam was and is in partnership with the forces of jihad; not even the sorriest illusion is in the same category as a book published by The Nation, written by Gore Vidal and flaunted at “anti-war” rallies, which argues that it was essentially George Bush who helped organize and anticipate the atrocity. That’s a level of degeneration unplumbed by any other faction. So, the pitiful peaceniks are the chief moral losers, whichever way you slice it.

ArphaRima · 10-09-2003 4:26am

Iraq had nothing to do with September 11th. Remember that.

"The case for war was weak." - Kofi Annan, Time Magasine.
Remember the chief cause for going to war was WMD. No WMD have been found. Claims of massive, fully developed, and weaponised secret weapons programs were false.

Iraqi soldiers are not terrorists or extremists, just patriots. If I was an Iraqi, despite an unjust ruler, I would fight any invading force. They came posing as liberators. Don't all occupiers.
If it is an American soldiers duty and belief that he is fighting for "freedom" surely it is an Iraqis right to do the same.
Freedom from foreign rule.

Iraq will become a puppet state of the USA. Military bases will be kept on Iraqi soil with or without the consent of the Iraqi nation. Any election will have vetted candidates, with CIA etc funding the favourite. This we know. Iraq is not free from tyrany, it just adopted a new form. Democracy my arse.

bonkey · 10-09-2003 6:44am

Originally posted by Xhen
I despise the fact that you hijacked an honorable name from Tolkien's book that you're not worthy of

No personal attacks, thank you.

If this thread doesn't stop descending into flamage, it will be locked. Some people clearly want to discuss the topic at hand. I suggest that the rest of you let them.

jc

Éomer of Rohan · 10-09-2003 9:25am

JC; I haven't flamed yet but if you say that what the majority of people are posting on this thread is off-topic then I'll be glad to create a new one and link it (if someone would be so good as to telegram me HOW to link it).

Quoted from Xhen
as if there was a moral equivalence between the United States and the Taliban?

First off, there is no moral equivalence; the USA loses hands down - what makes it a bitter pill to swallow is that the USA has the largest number of democratically elected positions of any country in the world and vaunts itself as the defender of peace and freedom yet it's foreign policy (one that supposedly represents the opinion of Americans) is absolutely not compliant with this self-assessment (cf Athenian Democracy from 478-323BC). The USA is the greatest terrorist the world has seen since the days of the British Empire - the only difference is that god forbid anyone call them that because they are a nation and double standards apply; they'll say we can't generalise because the people of America don't get a say in their foreign policy - but these same people are quite happy to believe that their 'freedoms' are under attack and that they are the most democratic free nation on earth when few things are further from the truth.

As for this conservative clap-trap (let's not let ourselves be lulled by the semi-criticism of the Bush Regime) about the working class in America - since WHEN have the working class in the USA EVER been in the driving seat? The Unions are tainted with the jingoism of the cold war, the politicians are prostituting themselves with greater and greater openness to the corporations who take the corporate tax breaks and then up stakes to Indo-China.

September the 11th was the time for leaders of the left to come out and damn America themselves - to break the nationalism that has permeated American working class politics since the inception of the state - it is just another piece of land. But no, the leaders of the left tried to outdo the damn republicans. Gore Vidal is not particularly revolutionary, neither is Noam Chomsky but both at least made a stab in the right direction.

Quoted from Xhen
The drama immediately puts the working class in the saddle as the necessary actor and rescuer of the said society

That's a type of political rhetoric called meaningless twaddle. I would actually like to see if you can justify it.

Quoted from Xhen
Let me take the strongest objection to my interpretation, which is that the events of Sept. 11, 2001, were exploited by conservatives to settle accounts with Saddam Hussein and that many Americans have been fooled into war by thinking that Iraq was behind the attacks

Wrong. He just took an objection he thought he could deal with and panned it off as the strongest. The strongest objection he has tried to dismiss as the folly of the left by saying that america is guiltless. If you need the exact reference...

Instead of which, the posturing loons all concentrated on a masturbatory introspection about American guilt

...and I must say the man has nerve; it was the very intention of the war(s) to STOP them from doing just that - by allowing them a way to jump on the nationalist jingoist bandwagon.

Quoted from Xhen
Here was the time for radicals to have demanded a war to the utmost against the forces of reaction,

I refuse to take this guy seriously; what he basically says here is that the radicals are only a good thing when their goals are the same as those of their reactionary counterparts. Why would a radical want to wage war for a regime that itself has crushed scores of peace and democracy, not to even touch on socialist movements???

The Americans were for years in bed with a hundred and one corrupt, dictatorial, nationalist regimes - several of which committed genocide; one of which killed a million of their own people thanks to the CIA backed and supported coup. The bottom line is that if it takes a few thousand American deaths more to bring events like that to a halt then so be it. Make no mistake however; if Ireland was a viciously imperial power and did the same things as the USA, then I would say precisely the same.

bloggs · 10-09-2003 9:26am

quote:

Quoted from Bananayoghurt
terrorists my arse, any Iraqi who bags himself an enemy soldier who invaded and blew the crap out of his country gets a big thumbs up from me

Not sure i would agree with the exact text, but as the Iraqi army didn't surrender, you could say the war hasn't ended in their case. So you can't call them terrorists. Acutally the French resistance during WW2 would be classed more as terrorists as the French Army had surrended to the Germans :rolleyes:

Saying that, it doesn't mean there aren't terrorists in the country.

As the Irish army isn't big enough to go toe to toe with any invading foe, it would be converted into a gurillia style force and work in the same way as 'Saddam Loyalists' are operating.

spongebob · 10-09-2003 11:35am

to get this locked.

/me /mulls

bug · 10-09-2003 11:57am

Not sure i would agree with the exact text, but as the Iraqi army didn't surrender, you could say the war hasn't ended in their case. So you can't call them terrorists. Acutally the French resistance during WW2 would be classed more as terrorists as the French Army had surrended to the Germans

It all relative to what side your on isn't it really...

I dont like the word terrorist, its a word that conjures up images of bad people with bombs.

When everyone's a terrorist, nobody asks why they took up a gun in the first place... and as we know addressing these issues is the only way to sort it out.

And as far as the Americans are concerned they should get the hell out of the middle-east its meddling in their affairs which has got them into the situation in the first place...see my sig..

Sand · 10-09-2003 10:24pm

Sure Sand - that one is fine as a matter of fact; the ones that I had a problem with were ones that people seemed to take out of context every time you posted in the same discussion as I did.

Grand so.

dsheehan · 10-09-2003 11:14pm

Originally posted by Éomer of Rohan
JC; I haven't flamed yet but if you say that what the majority of people are posting on this thread is off-topic then I'll be glad to create a new one and link it (if someone would be so good as to telegram me HOW to link it).

First off, there is no moral equivalence; the USA loses hands down

So the pluralist, republican nation which gives you a constitutional right to sprout on your horrendously unpopular and silly views loses to a theocracy which executes people for disagreeing with it? Put it this way, where would you prefer to live? The U.S. or under the Taliban?

- what makes it a bitter pill to swallow is that the USA has the largest number of democratically elected positions of any country in the world and vaunts itself as the defender of peace and freedom yet it's foreign policy (one that supposedly represents the opinion of Americans) is absolutely not compliant with this self-assessment (cf Athenian Democracy from 478-323BC).

American forgein policy has one major aim, keeping America safe. This is a very democratic aim as most people would vote for a government that keeps them safe from forgein governments. The primary duty of a government is the safetey of it's citizens. Secondary aims, include ensuring american economic interests prosper (therefore raising the living standards of the americans who vote for their government).

The USA is the greatest terrorist the world has seen since the days of the British Empire - the only difference is that god forbid anyone call them that because they are a nation and double standards apply; they'll say we can't generalise because the people of America don't get a say in their foreign policy - but these same people are quite happy to believe that their 'freedoms' are under attack and that they are the most democratic free nation on earth when few things are further from the truth.

Differant standards apply for nations then individuals. Are you trying to argue against that principle???? When the government locks up a thief, it is different then if an individual locks up someone who has stolen from him. If a government threatens imprisonment for someone who doesn't pay taxes, it's not extortion. If a government executes someone it is not murder. Vastly different rules apply for governments, because they are soverign. The soverign had power to do justice, make laws and rule the land. In a republican government, the power to make laws is in the legislature, the power to do justice is in the courts, and the general power to govern is in the executive.

On september 11th, many peoples freedoms were extinguished. The terrorists removed the freedom to live peacefully from 3,000 people by murdering them. The consequences of the attacks have made security a necessity in a country that was preciously very lax about it. However if you think america is so unfree, I suggest you visit the 120 odd other nations on this earth and see how free they are in comparison.

As for this conservative clap-trap (let's not let ourselves be lulled by the semi-criticism of the Bush Regime) about the working class in America - since WHEN have the working class in the USA EVER been in the driving seat? The Unions are tainted with the jingoism of the cold war, the politicians are prostituting themselves with greater and greater openness to the corporations who take the corporate tax breaks and then up stakes to Indo-China.

See, the american ideal is there is no working class, or middle class. No class wars for commies to pontificate about. The idea is that anyone can succeed.

The Americans were for years in bed with a hundred and one corrupt, dictatorial, nationalist regimes - several of which committed genocide; one of which killed a million of their own people thanks to the CIA backed and supported coup. The bottom line is that if it takes a few thousand American deaths more to bring events like that to a halt then so be it. Make no mistake however; if Ireland was a viciously imperial power and did the same things as the USA, then I would say precisely the same.

I'd like you to name all 101 nations that they supported. America tolerated, supported and kept quiet about many nasty governments during the cold war, because their number one priority was to protect america. The soviet union had 3,000 missiles and 200 armoured divisions and was the greatest threat to their security. So they supported dictators in central america, to stop under cuba. Cuba frightened them, and the reason for the cuban missile cirsis, was that missiles based in cuba could hit washington in less then 10 minutes, wiping out the leadership before a counter-attack could be ordered.

They supported the Taliban, to stop the soviet union expanding into central asia. They supported Sadam, the Shah ofIran, and the theocracy in saudi, to keep the oil supplies in the middle east safe.

Frankly they supported lots of nasty governments, but it was necessitated by the cold war.

Capt'n Midnight · 10-09-2003 11:35pm

RE:Iraqi soldiers are not terrorists or extremists, just patriots.
Actually they were mostly conscripts - It's an interesting distinction remember the Kuwait war, kill 50 people and it's wrong - take civilians force them to wear a uniform and a few weeks later it's OK to kill 100,000's of them ...

And about other posts about WWII - Soviets beat the Germans argue any way you like but most of the german army and most of the resources went to the eastern front.

To me the US seem taking a "dog in the manger" approach to the rest of the world with regard to taking reources and throwing thier weight around. And like many people who cause offense etc. they are easily offended etc.

The best monument to the towers would be for the US to understand that the rest of the world does not see them the way they see themselves or share thier selfish values. Here we Irish are seen as good Europeans - it would be nice to see the citizens of the US to be seen as good americans by the majority of people who live in the other countries in america.

In films I keep seeing "The Peace Corps" and I've not heard much about them elsewhere - IF they do what they are portrayed to do then perhaps setting up thier HQ there and giving the rest in funds to them...

I can't remember the start of the saying - but it ends "reaps the whirlwind"

Also the US should learn to Do unto others ...

RE the magnitude of the attack
911 (means nothing in the islamic calender btw) was terrible - but how many other people were murdered or killed in car accidents or died of preventable poverty related illness in NY that year ?

If any one complains about collatoral damage in current US campaigns, then at least less civilians were killed in recent US wars than in others (apart perhaps from greneda) - Vietnam 50,000 american soldiers , 2,000,000 civilians (more if you count cambodia)
Panama not sure how many civilians but perhaps 54,000 (yeah more dead than in 'nam over a shorter time from a smaller population)

Sorry for draging on but many governments are a greater threat to civilians than all the terrorists put together. One great trick when you are the ruler is to get the population united against a common enemy - then they put up with a lot more..

Do a pole on US citizens - a sizable number believe the CIA was involved (AKA suggestions of British Army in Talbot St bombings)...

But whatever for the site is suggested people will complain..

And I think using "ground zero" as the name is another example of US insensitivity to the pain of others - what happened at the real ground zero's were two orders of magnitude worse - imagine the reaction of US citizens if a bus boming in Isreal was called "ground zero" (given the relative sizes of populations it is the same %)

How about reinstating the government controlled milita - they could have thier HQ at the site. Then all the other illegal militia's could be disbanded and proper gun laws enforced - the over all reduction in killings would balance out what terrorists do worldwide.

Terrorist - on thier side
Freedom Fighter - on our side
Gurellia - when we're not quite sure whose side they are on

Capt'n Midnight · 10-09-2003 11:59pm

RE - Frankly they supported lots of nasty governments, but it was necessitated by the cold war.

So are you saying the cold war was necessary ?
in real politics most countries respect boarders / areas of influence - and in vietnam that stage of the war began when the japanese were defeated - ditto in korea / china
yes the US/USSR would have competed for clients - but it was cheaper and more effective to supply aid - look at the Answan dam in Egypt - look at Isreal - has got aid from UK / France / USSR / USA in turn..

- remember Italy had one of the worlds biggest communist party (2m) and no stable govenment (it was close call for democracy in that country - the danger being seen as US backed coup)

If you are saying the cold war was necessary then you must agree that current US policy is necessary.

US has acted against democracy / strongly supported non-democratic regimes in most (all) latin american countries , south vietnam , south korea , laos , cambodia , indonesia , about 1/3 of the countries in africa , iraq , iran , kuwait , saudi , pakistan , cuba etc. etc.

The Twin Towers

Comments