Has anyone ever stopped to think about WHY the attacks on sept 11th were carried out. Some people have being saying that those responsible are "pure evil" and such like. But does it not seem strange that sudenly, out of the blue, an organisation decides to attack america. Most Americans wouldnt stop to consider why it happened, they are all caught up in their patriotism and talking tough talk about killing Afghans. I have read many interesting articles about the things that the USA has done to the countries and people of the "terrorists" reside. I can not remember every detail of these so I will not repeat them incase i get them wrong. You will find many such articles if you look.
Ofcourse the people believe what the media tell them to believe, and the Government directly controls what the media tells the people.
I am ofcourse not trying to say that it was right to do what was done on sept. 11th, but I am saying there was a good reason for it.
All those who have been swept along in this wave of new found patriotism have been blinkered by the propoganda churned out by the US government. Do some research, you will be surprised, and you may not be so proud of your country as you are now.

it all comes down to perspective.

somalia for instance,

one man might say we have no right being there,

another might say we have no right letting 300,000 people die.

whose right?

whose wrong?

kuwait,

one man might say no blood for oil,

another might say, no matter our reasons the effect of the outcome is justified.

it all depends on what you think, and the way you feel.

to a lot of people on here(euro's mostly), america is a piece of shit place that can do no right.

if we ended starvation, it would be to add to our glory.

it's like the football coach who makes the 4th and goal decision to go for it,

if he makes it he's a genius, if he doesn't the fucker shouldn't be coaching flag football.

as for me,

i'll always side with the united states of america,

the people within it and who lead it however...

It is not just The United States that has certain skeletons hiding away in their closets. All Superpower countries have and will do acts that are considered "unpopular" by other nations and even the countries own citizens. This has occured throughout history and will occur in the future. The United States is only taking the heat now because they are in the spotlight. It used to be China, before that Russia/Soviet Union.

quote:

---

Originally posted by psychojoe:
Has anyone ever stopped to think about WHY the attacks on sept 11th were carried out. Some people have being saying that those responsible are "pure evil" and such like. But does it not seem strange that sudenly, out of the blue, an organisation decides to attack america. Most Americans wouldnt stop to consider why it happened, they are all caught up in their patriotism and talking tough talk about killing Afghans. I have read many interesting articles about the things that the USA has done to the countries and people of the "terrorists" reside. I can not remember every detail of these so I will not repeat them incase i get them wrong. You will find many such articles if you look.
Ofcourse the people believe what the media tell them to believe, and the Government directly controls what the media tells the people.
I am ofcourse not trying to say that it was right to do what was done on sept. 11th, but I am saying there was a good reason for it.
All those who have been swept along in this wave of new found patriotism have been blinkered by the propoganda churned out by the US government. Do some research, you will be surprised, and you may not be so proud of your country as you are now.

---

Whatever we did to them is because they deserved it. I hope they all die. We sought military targets, civilians were accidents. They sought innocent people... that is quite a big difference. We should nuke them all. Cheap but efficient. I am sure that if they had nukes, they would have already used them on us.

Whatever we did to them is because they deserved it. I hope they all die. We sought military targets, civilians were accidents. They sought innocent people... that is quite a big difference. We should nuke them all. Cheap but efficient. I am sure that if they had nukes, they would have already used them on us.

onefinefellar: I agree that USA's actions seem more "humane" than those employed by those you call terrorists. You say that they are getting what they deserved for what they did to the US, but im sure they are saying that the US got what it deserved for what it had done to them.
What I am saying is that it is an endless cycle of revenge. You will never be able to "kill them all", as you want, and the survivors will be left bitter and resentful, breeding a new generation of "terrorists" even more bent on revenge against the US that this current generation. To defeat their violence with more violence requires their total and complete destruction. This is not possible. There will allways be someone in the world ready o take up their views. Fight war with peace, break the cycle of revenge or it will never end.

I would like to know what inside info onefinefeller has that lets him know that we sought only military targets. You only believe what Rumsfeld and his cohorts in the media tell you. Have you never heard of Iran Air shot down by a USS Vincennes while on its normal flight path, full of innocent civilians. Sure, the Navy said it was an accident, but come on, we know the truth. And why do you think that its ok for innocents to die as long as they are "collateral damage?" I say death is something to mourned no matter how it occurs.
And I don't even know how to reply to your statement that we nuke them. You obviously haven't thought that through at all.

"You only believe what Rumsfeld and his cohorts in the media tell you."

need i say more?

here's a guy who would doubt what "rumsfeld and his co-horts" told him they had for breakfast.

thinking man,

do you think they lie to their closest friends as well?

your "objective view" already tells me your answer.

My point was that onefinefeller seems to have info that none of us have. Do I think that Rumsfeld constantly lies? No. Do I think he constantly tells the truth? No. Do I think that he and the media color what is said to make it more palatable to Americans. Yes. I hope he is telling the truth when he says they aren't targeting civilians. The repeated bombing of the Red Cross suggests otherwise, but that could have been a mistake. What I'm saying is I don't know what is going on and neither does onefinefeller nor do you lostmind. I'm not quite sure what point you are trying to make by asking if I believe they lie to their closest friends. I don't know what they are telling their closest friends.

the point i'm trying to make is that truth doesn't matter.

it what's you think.

did you rumsfeld before 9-11 or what his character was like?

you opinions like mine are based on prejudices,

whether for or against.

the point i'm making is it doesn't even if what rumsfeld is true or not.

your mind is already made up.

as for the spin they put on it to make it more palatable for americans.

one could say you put a spin onto to disgust americans.

which comes to the point of my first post,

if you are for something you will support it wholeheartedly,

if you are against something, that something and all involved are total evil and no good can come from it at all.

I disagree. I think truth does matter. But I get what your saying. We believe what we want to believe and alot of the time the truth doesn't get in the way.

As for Rumsfeld, I really had no opinion on him before 9/11. But I have to admit I'm not a fan of hawks. He and Wolfowitz seem to eager to escalate this "war" for my comfort.

You seem to be a fan of a black and white world, us vs. them. I think I see things more in the grey. I love the US and because I love it, I criticize it. I want it to be what it was meant to be so I don't turn a blind eye to its negatives.

I don't think I'm putting a spin on anything. Or maybe its closer to the truth that I put my own spin on everything. They are my opinions so they show my biases. If they are different from yours, great, that's one of the basic rights of living in this country. What I'm talking about with Rumsfeld and the media is the censoring of any information that they think Americans don't want to hear. Have you watched one of his press conferences? He sure has a witty way of telling us nothing. And the term "collateral damage" is obvious spin. Why don't we take away people's humanity a little more?

things are black and white aren't they?

you either agree with something or disagree,
you like it or you dislike it,

"They are my opinions so they show my biases"

exactly.

that sounds black and white to me.

I don't think that things are quite as cut and dried as you like to make them seem. I like the US, but I disagree with some of its policies. Terrorism is wrong, but one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter.
I can separate my opinions from the facts of the world. Yes, I have biases. We all do. But I realize that my biases don't necessarily make me right. And having biases is different from blindly following. I'm not afraid to change my opinions if they are shown to be wrong.
You obviously have very strong opinions, lostmind, which is fine, I like debates and I definitely don't want everyone thinking the same, but I get the sense that you would hold onto them no matter the proof presented you.

quite the contrary,

"I like the US, but I disagree with some of its policies. Terrorism is wrong, but one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter."

that's black and white thinking if i ever heard it.

my black and white mentality may come from being a programmer,

i see 1's and 0's in everything. on or off, agree disagree,

logistics, things either equal or they don't,

i like string beans, i don't like string beans.

even taken in the context of a whole,

this many people support, this many people don't.

you'd think grey would make you an automaton and opinionless.

accepting of whatever.

I think we have different definitions of black and white compared to gray. Of course some of our opinions, likes and dislikes are black and white. Like you said, I like string beans, I don't like string beans. However, the world as a whole is not black and white. I may not like string beans but there are a lot of people out there who do and so I don't have the right to tell them to stop eating them. And I think there are plenty of people who are indifferent to string beans. Eat them if they're there, not think about them if they are not.
Contrary to being an automaton and accepting of anything, I think looking at the world as gray allows a person to make informed decisions and have educated opinions, not just knee-jerk reactions.

quote:

---

Originally posted by lostmind:
"You only believe what Rumsfeld and his cohorts in the media tell you."

need i say more?

here's a guy who would doubt what "rumsfeld and his co-horts" told him they had for breakfast.

thinking man,

do you think they lie to their closest friends as well?

your "objective view" already tells me your answer.

---

I agree with that. But that goes for all Parties running the whitehouse and not just the GOP's.

Clintons admin ran it the same way.

Its funny how its always the same faces sitting the front seats of the Media pool. I thought a pool was like a lottery. You were picked at random yet its always the same damn faces. I admit i still watch CNN for basic info on current events but i no longer believe everything that is pumped into the idiot box. Hmm Television for those of you who saw that as an open door.

maybe its cus america is an asshole to the rest of the world?

Were america we bitch and moin about anything we want to

It IS a black and white issue. NO GRAY can be seen when these 9-11 terrorists KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING....PLANNED DOING IT FOR A LONG TIME, and wanted to do it so bad that they were willing to KILL THEMSELVES in order to kill innocent civilians. That's total, pure, absolute fanatic HATRED, and hatred is ALWAYS BLACK!!! No gray can be seen on this one. Sorry guys. Love, Venus

What did the U.S. do that apparently wronged the middle eastern countries and particularly Bin Laden? I saw no examples anywhere in thes thread.
Let's see, the U.S. actually supplied Osama and the Afghan people with money and military arms and other equipment to fight off the Russians. The U.S. helped Afghanistan fend off the Russians. When that battle was over we left and didn't look back. Because the U.S. didn't give Afghanistan money to rebuild their country after ten years of war they began to resent the U.S. who had helped them keep their country safe from the invading Russians. This and having troops stationed in Saudi Arabia, (Osama's homeland and the holy land to the muslim peoples) pissed him and others off. This is the main reasons for the actions of Osama and the taliban. Please post other reasons they had for attacking the U.S.

and you never will, you'll just see teenangsters like acidtroop bad mouthing it to show how rebellious 15 year old boys can be.

hey acidtrooper, you know acid is supposed to open your mind not close it.

you should be able to see both sides of the coin in everything and then decide where you stand from there.

realizing fully, that right and wrong is just your pathetic little perspective.