America Attacked Aftermath and news

from JoeUser Forums
Having been to the World Trade Organization on numerous occasions, I find myself completely stunned by the events. To imagine that gigantic building full of people simply gone is just horrifying.

At the same time, the civilized world seems to have come together to join the United States in what may become a coordinated crusade to eradicate terrorism. Such a thing seems impossible but consider this:

If the United States and the world community can retaliate in such sufficient force, then political terrorists will have to weigh their goals versus the inevitable response. History has shown that massive retaliation does work. As barbaric has it has been in history, it was an effective means of keeping terrorism under control. Terrorism has always been with us and will be. But perhaps if the proper response can be achieved, it can be seen in the same light that we see nuclear weapons, that terrorism is so horrible and the consquences of it so painful, that it won't be used as a political tool.

Of course, this all assumes that there was a political ends being sought in some sick way rather than simply pure madness.

NATO has activated article 5. This has never been done. This means that NATO considers what has occurred as an act of war. This means Germany, UK, France, Spain, Italy, Greece, etc. all consider this attack as an attack on themselves and will respond accordingly. It is unprecedented.

Whoever did this, wherever they are, I do not think they realize the whirlwind they have just sewn.

What do you think?
47,227 views 79 replies
Reply #1 from JoeUser Forums Top
Out of respect for the people here, I'll refrain from posting a full comment as I've already forced other listservs and boards into moderation with my feelings.

I will say that when the time arises, I will seek to return to active duty so.
Reply #2 from JoeUser Forums Top
Everything has changed.

It will NEVER be the same again.

Whoever did this just started an avalanche. And when we find out who did this, there's going to
to be HELL to pay!!
Groupy 2 - Organize multiple applications into grouped tabs on your Windows desktop
Reply #3 from JoeUser Forums Top
Massive retalition works? Does it? Name a precedent that has to do with terrorism? That article five stuff is weirdness. It means NATO is at war (so to speak) with an unknown enemy.
Reply #4 from JoeUser Forums Top
>Massive Retaliation works? Does it?

In 146 BC After two previous wars, Rome ended the third punic war by razing the city of Carthage, burning every building, salting the earth, killing all the men, and enslaving all the women and children. Carthage ceased to exist, and nothing has existed there since. Their lands became prosperous under Roman rule, and enjoyed hundreds of years of peace thereafter.

In 70 AD, and many uprisings in Palenstine mainly by iconoclastic jews offended by the Roman imperial eagle, Jerusalem is razed, every building is destroyed and the survivors are sold into slavery. In 135 AD, Emperor Hadrian rebuilds the city, but Jews are forbidden from living there. The city would never again be a Jewish city until 1949, 1879 years later. Religious zealots did not impede the daily lives of people in Palestine for a long time after this. Trade and agriculture flourished, and Palestine became far richer than it ever had under the barberous rule of the line of David.

In 1949 AD, after 4 years of fighting, massive casualties on both sides, the Americans dropped two atomic bombs, in total 150,000 are killed. Japan surrenders just a few days after the first bomb is dropped. Japan is reorganized by the US, a free market economy is put in place, and within 30 years of the US leaving the country, it became second only to the US in economic power.

I propose that ONLY massive retaliation works. Only when the offending country is massively, utterly destroyed and they unconditionally surrender does the violence stop. Terrorists have it right. Terror does work. Now, they will feel the terror.
Reply #5 from JoeUser Forums Top
My thoughts are this, and I’ve had a lot of them in the last 24 hours. We must never let what this country stands for, Freedom, for ALL. That is what makes this country strong the very bedrock that it has been built on. At work today someone made the comment that we should close out borders and stop letting immigrants in. What seems to be forgotten is that this country was built by immigrants, and unless you’re a Native American there is at least one person in your family tree that came from another country to find the freedom and chance to have a life worth living for their children. If we close our doors and our hearts to anyone who is looking to make a new life the Evil that has committed these acts has won. Now is the time to morn and pray for those who are gone and those who have lost so much. We who defend will prepare for the order to go forth and find those who have caused tragedy. We who have taken an oath to defend will do so with out reservation even if it means that we might not come back. We will not think of our selves but of all the people of the world that are free and so that they may remain free and not be imprisoned by fear and uncertainty. Morn for those that have died, and Pray for those who still are and will be in harms way. Do not let hate and fear rule the day, for it does not matter what Color your skin, the God to which you pray or the Language that you speak we are all Americans in the end. These are my thoughts as disjointed as they are. Peace to all.

Reply #6 from JoeUser Forums Top
I don't know if you guys have read this yet, here I quote by prophet Nostradamus in 1654... "In the City of God there will be a great thunder, Two brothers torn apart by Chaos, while the fortress endures, the great leader will succumb" "The third big war will begin when the big city is burning" -Nostradamus- 1654

How freaky is that???
Reply #7 from JoeUser Forums Top
He didn't say it. It's one of those things that gets made up and passed around during major events.
Reply #8 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yeah, me too, I think the whole planet should just be nuked. That will surely take care of terrorism for ever.
Reply #9 from JoeUser Forums Top
The above was in answer to Ben.
Now about the actual topic posted by Brad, here are my thoughts.
Firstly terrorism hides in the shadows. It comes from nowhere and everywhere. They could be of any nationality, even Americans. You can't fight and win against terrorism. You can punish the perpetrators as they do their horrible deeds, but you can't put a definate end to it.
About the NATO thing, I only hope it doesn't lead into yet more innocent lives lost.
Reply #10 from JoeUser Forums Top
In response to the above (supposed) Nostradamus 'quote':

http://www.snopes2.com/inboxer/hoaxes/predict.htm
Reply #11 from JoeUser Forums Top
As a Roman history buff, there is a point to what Zapp is saying. Whoever messed with Rome lived to regret it...or rather died to regret it. But I'd still not want to live in a Pax Romana (unless of course I was Roman).

Terrorism is used in today's society because it works. But there are boundaries, and I think we just found one. There's a point where people say enough is enough.

Of course I'm not in the US right now, but looking from afar, how can everyone be so sure who it is? It all seems awfully convinient to me, as if the story were already ready for printing before it happened. Of course I'm not saying there was a conspiracy. After all, what government agency would benefit from this? If they wanted a war they can find much easier means of getting one. What I am saying is that perhaps they know far less, and maybe this is just an easy story to believe. Of course, though, time will tell.
Reply #12 from JoeUser Forums Top
For quite some time, so-called legitimate governments have allowed terrorists to openly operate from within their borders. The Taliban are able to easily find and catch UN workers accussed of teaching Christian beliefs, but can't find proof that Bin Laden operates a terrorist organization. This is no longer acceptable.
The Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Afganistan and any other country that will not accept the responsibilities of sovereign status, will lose the benefits of sovereign status. They cannot hide behind ignorance nor avoid the responsibilty for actions conducted by their friends from within their borders.
The Taliban, a government that has been uncivilized to their own citizens (women are citizens, whether the Taliban acknowledge them so or not) and uncivilized to the rest of the world, must no longer be allowed to hide terrorists. This isn't religion, this isn't politics. Good people MUST fight evil to survive.
BTW, did Nostradamus say anything about technology stocks? How about the Super Bowl?
Reply #13 from JoeUser Forums Top
All I can say is that if the stock market doesn't open soon, gas prices don't stay down, and air traffic doesn't resume in the VERY near future, th whole world will most likely experience an ecenomic depression. And if the we (the US) along with our allies don't attack and punish all terrorism supporting countries, we will be attacked again, and again, and again...
Reply #14 from JoeUser Forums Top
I think websites dedicated to graphic design should not throw their hats into the political arena

I find it funny that these terrorists think that, after this act, they would be smiled upon by Allah when in actuality they are probably screaming at the gates of Hell.

Go ahead, flame me.

Reply #15 from JoeUser Forums Top
MooShoo -- Good point, however I think we may be damned if we do, damned if we don't.

By the way, I was just at the Newark airport in March and I'm here to tell you that security blows. I could have brought an AK-47 into the airport and told someone it was just a toy. No one but passengers are allowed beyond the security gates? Explain how my brother got past simply by explaining to the guard that I was blind and needed assistance--and I'm certainly NOT blind. These airport managers need to quit kidding themselves about the degree of security in their airports. I DID NOT feel safe flying, and after this, will probably never fly again.

Reply #16 from JoeUser Forums Top
Australians, too, died....therefore the act of terrorism, although not conducted in Australia, resulted in the deaths of Australians, and thus we, too, have been attacked....
Reply #17 from JoeUser Forums Top
This is an international issue. Current estimates are that 500 Britons died, which is precisely why the UK is publically stating that it will Stand shoulder to shoulder with the US.

The UK has almost always sent one of the highest volumes of troops to deal with conflict in Europe, and throughout the world to support international campaigns. There is no doubt the UK will do this again, but I sincerely hope that if force is used, then other countries will also pull their weight.

Other thoughts that counter this are of careful consideration. Bin Laden is backed by the Taliban, who are supported by Pakistan who most believe are a nuclear power.

My final thought is that maybe those in the US who have supported the IRA torrorism campaign against the British government over the past 30 years will reconsider their opinion now that they finally understand what terrorism really is.
Reply #18 from JoeUser Forums Top
Excuse me, if my words are bitter, but...
I regret about those people who's been there, one hundred times more I regret about those who will never come back from there.
I am from Russia. You know about Chechnya, its terrorists, which we are eliminating now. Up to yesterday those chechens have received aid from the US.
US bombed Iraq from the safe distance.
US bombed Jugoslavia.
So, what did you thought? That you can play this game foirever?
Now, Powell wants to organize an international antiterrorist coalition. WHy not two years earlier, when two houses at Moscow were blown? We said then, that terrorism is _not_ an inner affair, it could strike anyone. None heard. Maybe we should have been louder...
Maybe.

But, anyway, I regret. All abovesaid is NOT those people's fault.
Sorry, if I was rude and excuse my English.
Reply #19 from JoeUser Forums Top
SSL_tin, I think the key is the state of US awareness. Remember, they got their fingers burnt in Vietnam where they got in and couldn't not get out. You guys had the same in Afghanistan and to some degree Chechnya.

The distinction between the 2 is that the US had a SPECIFIC target - a nation. The experience of other nations including both Russia, UK, Spain is one of terrorists, which the problem is with a MINORITY of individuals, which cannot be targetted 'en-masse'.

There are millions of Muslims around the world, and the vast majority have condemned this act as un-Islamic, so the minority who (it is believed) do this in the name of Islam are actually wrong in the eyes of most. There is a problem of a generic backlash against Muslims which is thoroughly inappropriate. One of the main dangers is that entreme right wing organisations in the Western world use this as an "excuse" to justify their dangerous beliefs.

Not even yet do I believe the average US citizen has really taken in the impact of this. Please excuse this following statement as it is MY perception, but the AVERAGE US citizen is thoroughly myopic in their understanding of the world. There is no world that affects them beyond their immediate national borders.

Once this sinks in, and the U.S. realise they ARE part of a bigger world, and there ARE people who don't see them as a 'perfect' country, the U.S. will be a better place. That is not to say this was a good thing to happen, definitely not, but the US WILL become a better country for it because the eyes of the AVERAGE citizen will be opened.
Reply #20 from JoeUser Forums Top
Yes, _Martin_, it is so.
It will be "small step for an average man, but a great leap for a nation" I think.
I'm afraid of a NATION whose politicians think that war in Jugoslavia si it's (american) inner affair. I'm afraid of people that support terrorista all over the world.
But I believe that this horror will wake up the majority of people.
Reply #21 from JoeUser Forums Top
Their sleep will be disturbed, then they turn onto their other side and snore on.
Reply #22 from JoeUser Forums Top
... which is the most frightening prospect of all
Reply #23 from JoeUser Forums Top
SSL: The United States gave no aid to Chechnya. So please get your facts straight. Secondly, the United states was only critical of Russia's acts in Chechnya when its military was being indiscriminate. At no time has the United States supported Chechnya's bid for independence.

Yugoslavia was a NATO action. A NATO action that targeted only military units. Did NATO try to level Belgrade? No. Why did NATO intervene in the first place? Because the Serbs were systematically esterminating (cleansing) the inhabitans of Kosovo. So why are you condemning the United States in Kosovo and not NATO? And how can you remotely equate military action in Kosovo with the murder of 20,000 civilians in an office building?

The United States has always been against terrorism. How short your memory seems to be. It was the United States who struck terrorist operations in Sudan and Pakistan not that long ago. How about the United States striking Lybia in '85?

But this attack changes everything. I think you'll see a willingness of the United States and the international community to coordinate their efforts and ignore international borders. This is war now. This isn't a police action. If a nation doesn't eliminate the terrorists in their own borders, you will see the Internetional community go in to those nations and clean it up for them by force.

Reply #24 from JoeUser Forums Top
I agree with Frogboy's comments whole heartedly.

My only fear is that only a few countries will bear the burden of risking their people's lives to do this.

It appears (and this is based on impression rather than hard fact), that in the majority of cases (especially within Europe) it is left largely to the US and UK to provide the military might (with occassional support from Canada and other European nations).
Reply #25 from JoeUser Forums Top
i am feeling confused by this whole thing
this is a great tragerty, but one view that is starting to emerge in the UK news is that what is important is how may UK citicens have died, rather than how many people have died.
why is the death of some total stranger from one contry far more "important" than the death of a total stranger from a different contry?

personally i feel that these people should be given more even consideration. i somehow suspect that if this had happened in the middle of a 3rd world contry then western news would be far less exctited by this tragic event.