NationStates Jolt Archive

Just a few things I noted on the 9/11 attacks, hopefully Bin Laden wont read this and get some ideas :)

Anyway...
First off, the planes hit the tops (Or near enough) of the towers, if the terrorists had been trying for a real killer-blow they would have tried for further down, IE: The middle of the building.
Not only would the towers have collapsed, they also most likely would have fallen over sideways, instead of just falling down like they did. This would have taken out a HUGE area and killed quite alot more people.

The timing. They attacked just after summer ended. If they had attacked a few months earlier the buildings would have been full of tourists, especially at the later hours of the day.

Lack of backups. Apparently the terrosists had NO backup plans, if any of the planes failed, they were gone, as happened with the plane where the passengers defeated the terrorists.

No other attacks. They didnt take advantage of the shock. If it were me planning the attacks I would have done a few other things, blown up the Golden Gate or something. It was nearly impossible to do anything after 9/11 because of the huge security increases and the general paranoia.

Use of Arab terrorists. Wouldnt it have been better to use European or American terrorists? Its quite hard to peresecute the majority. And Ive heard Al-Queda did not lack for American/Euro recruits, although these might not have been willing to kill themselves to attack America.

Feel free to add more, or debate these points. I do realize that Al-Queda is not a rich organization, but they apparently have a good sized member base, and the intelligence to figure most of this out.

This all leads me to believe that the WTC was NOT supposed to collapse, I think the terrorists were just going for a 'Hey, look what we can do!' sort of thing, to make the US feel that it was vulnerable, and possibbly kill a few hundred people (Not to make light of the attacks.)

And for those who dont know, there were some twenty thosand people in the WTC the day of the attacks. 3,000 died, which is horrible by itself, but it could have been MUCH worse.

Again, I do not wish to make light of these attacks, support or condone terrorism, standard disclaimer thing.

Just a few things I noted on the 9/11 attacks, hopefully Bin Laden wont read this and get some ideas :)

Anyway...
First off, the planes hit the tops (Or near enough) of the towers, if the terrorists had been trying for a real killer-blow they would have tried for further down, IE: The middle of the building.
Not only would the towers have collapsed, they also most likely would have fallen over sideways, instead of just falling down like they did. This would have taken out a HUGE area and killed quite alot more people.

The timing. They attacked just after summer ended. If they had attacked a few months earlier the buildings would have been full of tourists, especially at the later hours of the day.

Lack of backups. Apparently the terrosists had NO backup plans, if any of the planes failed, they were gone, as happened with the plane where the passengers defeated the terrorists.

No other attacks. They didnt take advantage of the shock. If it were me planning the attacks I would have done a few other things, blown up the Golden Gate or something. It was nearly impossible to do anything after 9/11 because of the huge security increases and the general paranoia.

Use of Arab terrorists. Wouldnt it have been better to use European or American terrorists? Its quite hard to peresecute the majority. And Ive heard Al-Queda did not lack for American/Euro recruits, although these might not have been willing to kill themselves to attack America.

Feel free to add more, or debate these points. I do realize that Al-Queda is not a rich organization, but they apparently have a good sized member base, and the intelligence to figure most of this out.

This all leads me to believe that the WTC was NOT supposed to collapse, I think the terrorists were just going for a 'Hey, look what we can do!' sort of thing, to make the US feel that it was vulnerable, and possibbly kill a few hundred people (Not to make light of the attacks.)

And for those who dont know, there were some twenty thosand people in the WTC the day of the attacks. 3,000 died, which is horrible by itself, but it could have been MUCH worse.

Again, I do not wish to make light of these attacks, support or condone terrorism, standard disclaimer thing.
Well, maybe they'll have a more devastating plan next time *shrug*
What would you like? Lethal virus? Chemical attack? Dirty bomb? Nuclear attack?

Im not complaining, just observing. Heh, maybe MKULTRA will find the Bush connection in here.

Im not complaining, just observing. Heh, maybe MKULTRA will find the Bush connection in here.
There's no use complaining anyway. It's bound to happen sooner or later. Not neccessarily in the US, but there will be a devastating terrorist attack - or multiple - in the not so distant future. At the rate terrorism gains in power each day, I'd not be surprised if the big bang happens next year. Especially if the US decide to waltz over yet another sovereign nation for geostrategical gain.

Is it a good thing that these terrorists are opportunists who act on impulse/emotion, rather than intelligence from a solid state based intelligence structure?

For the terrorists it can be an advantage for some things, but bad for others.

It's probably best that they are not as organised as the intelligence agencies.

Im not complaining, just observing. Heh, maybe MKULTRA will find the Bush connection in here.
Can't be that hard. It's probably someting obvious along the lines of:
-the CIA trained/funded Bin Laden in the 80's

and

-George Bush Snr was once head of the CIA, maybe even *in that era


*not sure about the when

Just a few things I noted on the 9/11 attacks, hopefully Bin Laden wont read this and get some ideas :)

Anyway...
First off, the planes hit the tops (Or near enough) of the towers, if the terrorists had been trying for a real killer-blow they would have tried for further down, IE: The middle of the building.
Not only would the towers have collapsed, they also most likely would have fallen over sideways, instead of just falling down like they did. This would have taken out a HUGE area and killed quite alot more people.

The timing. They attacked just after summer ended. If they had attacked a few months earlier the buildings would have been full of tourists, especially at the later hours of the day.

Lack of backups. Apparently the terrosists had NO backup plans, if any of the planes failed, they were gone, as happened with the plane where the passengers defeated the terrorists.

No other attacks. They didnt take advantage of the shock. If it were me planning the attacks I would have done a few other things, blown up the Golden Gate or something. It was nearly impossible to do anything after 9/11 because of the huge security increases and the general paranoia.

Use of Arab terrorists. Wouldnt it have been better to use European or American terrorists? Its quite hard to peresecute the majority. And Ive heard Al-Queda did not lack for American/Euro recruits, although these might not have been willing to kill themselves to attack America.

Feel free to add more, or debate these points. I do realize that Al-Queda is not a rich organization, but they apparently have a good sized member base, and the intelligence to figure most of this out.

This all leads me to believe that the WTC was NOT supposed to collapse, I think the terrorists were just going for a 'Hey, look what we can do!' sort of thing, to make the US feel that it was vulnerable, and possibbly kill a few hundred people (Not to make light of the attacks.)

And for those who dont know, there were some twenty thosand people in the WTC the day of the attacks. 3,000 died, which is horrible by itself, but it could have been MUCH worse.

Again, I do not wish to make light of these attacks, support or condone terrorism, standard disclaimer thing.
Good thoughts. I hadnt realized much of that.

There was also the question of why, if terrorists had flown over Indian Point (nuclear power plant), didn't they crash into it, b/c it would cause much more destruction?

(however I think that last question has been answered by somebody)

There was also the question of why, if terrorists had flown over Indian Point (nuclear power plant), didn't they crash into it, b/c it would cause much more destruction?

(however I think that last question has been answered by somebody)

Supposedly, it'd be difficult to reach the core. 6 foot concrete walls and then the core is down far below ground according to some Indian Point official.

^What he said.
Nuclear reactors arent quite as undefended as most people think, even though its mostly to keep things IN.
Plus the fallout wouldnt have been that bad, unless they somehow avoided damaging the reactor itself, and just took out the regulator/cooling systems, a bit of uranium would have been chucked around, and the area would have a little fallout, but otherwise nothing major would have happened.
Of course, Im not a nuclear engineer, Im sure there are a few (or at least, some who THINK they are) on this forum :)

Here's the greatest conspiracy theory for Bush's involvement or complicitness..


http://home.earthlink.net/~killtown/bush.html

An interesting point if true...Bush was at a school 3 miles away from an airport. If they truly wanted to kill him then why wouldn't they just attack the elementry school? Knowing that they didn't want to kill him or Cheney, why did they both run away?

Where the terrorists failed, hmm... well let's start with this:

It wasn't an act of terror.

People always look at me funny when I say that, but hear me out. The attacks on September 11th were not an act of terror, though they were perpitrated by a group with a history of terrorist activity. The attacks were a television show. Were you honestly afraid that planes were going to come and crash into your house, your school, the one story building in the small town where you live? No, of course you weren't. The DC sniper was significantly more effective at creating terror than the 9/11 attacks were and that was just 2 people with minimal funding. 9/11 wasn't about scaring people, it was about showing the world that the U.S. isn't invulnerable. It was about taking something that symbolizes the prosperity of the U.S. (and to Al-Queda, its tyranny) and destroying it while everyone watched. It didn't matter that people weren't going to be afraid because of the attacks, it only mattered that everyone knew that 19 men with box cutters destroyed a symbol of what the U.S. stands for and killed 3000 people. The point was the make the U.S. look stupid and weak, and to make Americans feel helpless. In those respects the attacks were completely successful, particularly amongst government officials. Within days the government had "taken control" of the situation, passed new laws, and begun making plans for retaliation. All of Washington DC sat up and said, "we're not weak and we'll prove it." The war in Afghanistan was as much to soothe the egos and nerves of the beurocrats in Washington as to prevent further attacks. The war in Iraq, which by all rights should not be considered part of the war on terror, was the administration's way of say, "We're still strong and independent. No one can tell us what to do, not even the UN." The higher the body count, the bigger the press. We didn't do it all at once, but we've killed more people in Afghanistan and Iraq than were killed in New York and Washington on the 11th and for no greater reason than because the administration couldn't stand by and let an organization as comparatively small and underfunded get the better of the U.S. government in a media war. We killed more people, destroyed more buildings, caused more fear, and got more tv coverage than Al-Queda ever could. In the end the attacks on the 11th were a failure despite their apparent success initially because Al-Queda is simply not a large or powerful enough organization to compete with the U.S. government in anything. Osama got himself into a fight he couldn't possibly win, and even though he threw the first punch, and it was a big one, the American war machine is unstoppable.

Well their suicide bombers they are not real bright.

Well their suicide bombers they are not real bright.

Hehe, as opposed to the average redneck American? *LOL* :rolleyes:

Im not going to say much, but I really hate it when people say that all/most Americans are idiots.
Our President might not be Mr. Smartyguy, but that doesnt mean the average American isnt at least high-school educated.

I'd like to take the first post and Our Earth's post and add my own two cents, for I think they both danced around a very important point I wish to call to your collective attention.

One of the single greatest goals of a guerilla warfare group is to force their opponent to take harsh measures against the wrong targets. By eliminating moderate voices, burning towns, raping civilians, locking up dissenters, preventing free speech; any/all/or more of these will turn popular opinion against a government. It will harden their own base of followers as the actions taken against them are more extreme; it may shock neutral parties into line with the group itself.

In short, by upping the ante, the guerilla group ensures that their target becomes an instrument of its own destruction. It may in fact be eradicated itself in the process, but the target will also likely fall or be crippled.

From theory to reality:

Bin-Laden's group is partly a terrorist cell structure; but it has its roots, as many know, in Afgani resistance groups against the Russian incursion there. Thus the thinking behind their strategy shares similarity to both traditional terrorist mentality and guerilla fighters.

For example; a terrorist group could not reasonably expect demands to be met after 9/11. The act was far too large, far too damaging, and cost the US far too much face. As a terroist act, 9/11 was simply crossed the line.

As a military strike, they had hit the Pentagon (command and control) and the WTC (Economic, Morale, Civilian Communications); but as the posters pointed out, no follow-ups were planned, or really possible to carry out with much success. A full-scale uprising is not possible that deep in enemy territory, cell-based structures made it impossible to summon considerable manpower, logistics for such an operation alone would make discovery almost certain.

Thus the 9/11 attacks were not military in nature right? Well...no and yes. They were still terrorist in nature, but military in conception, and a strange hybrid of the two in reality. They best fit in the catagory of "Unorthodox Warfare" or "Asymmetrical Warfare" ; extraordinary attacks that focus on long-term gains, shaking up the globe and looking for an opportunity to arise, or...bringing an opponent to follow with extraordinary measures of its own.

Thus we come to the "War on Terror" a very unorthodox method to deal with a very complex problem; a military/terrorist group with unrealistic goals and uncomprimising agendas.

I'm pretty sure you can see where I'm going with this. The US, in fact, HAS taken extraordinary measures to meet this threat: "The War on Terror" is the label for these changes. How much these actions play into the long-term goals of Bin-Laden's group remains to be seen, but many groups and induviduals warn of the problems that such reactions might have. Its obvious that many have no conception of such tactics or strategy, but such is the nature or protest movements.

i heard the wtc could hold 50k or at least general area and as it was 830ish if they had waited another hour or so then everyone should have been at work(american work ethic +road blocks etc) and so death toll thru the roof

Al Queda supposidly wanted to attack more targets, but cut it down to increase the odds of a few coming off rather than going for it all and increase the risk of being found out. If they had hit lower, they would have killed thousands more. Your fate was essentially decided when the planes hit. 99% of the people below the explosion got out, 99% above didn't.

Anyway...
First off, the planes hit the tops (Or near enough) of the towers, if the terrorists had been trying for a real killer-blow they would have tried for further down, IE: The middle of the building.
Not only would the towers have collapsed, they also most likely would have fallen over sideways, instead of just falling down like they did. This would have taken out a HUGE area and killed quite alot more people.The law of physics does not work like that. The building can not react like, say a bottle which can fall and stay into one piece. It's more like a castle in the sand. Its structure is not stable. It you remove one part, it all falls appart and the law of gravity makes it fall from up to down.

Note though that the second plane was more fucossed at the middle.

I think the WTC twin towers were not the main target and the goal was not to kill as much as possible, but to make as much politicians gather in the white house and in the pentagon as possible.
I think the later were the main target.
And remember Al Qaeda was at war in Afghanistan against the Northern Alliance. The US was involved as well. I think it was an act of war rather than an act of terrorism, although the US people do not understand because they are some kind of separated from the rest of the world and don't know much about what is happening outside of the US and where their country is involved.

My youngest daughter and a bunch of her friends were in Windows On The World reastaurant at the top of one of the towers just one day before the attacks on the WTC. She was effectively "trapped in New York" when they grounded all flights just before she was to board hers and had to walk back into the City when most were walking out.

I didn't realize how deeply all of this had affected me until she walked in the door several days later. I grabbed her, weeping, and would not let her go. She kept telling me, "I'm OK, Daddy! It's OK!" My wife finally had to pry my arms loose! So this issue hits very close to home for me.

The thing which bothers me most about this thread is those who attempt to somehow link President Bush to the attacks, some even suggesting that the President was behind the attacks, or ignored advance knowledge of them. I regard this as borderline treason.

If you want to make sure I totally despise you, just post this sort of idiocy.

Just a few things I noted on the 9/11 attacks, hopefully Bin Laden wont read this and get some ideas :)

Anyway...
First off, the planes hit the tops (Or near enough) of the towers, if the terrorists had been trying for a real killer-blow they would have tried for further down, IE: The middle of the building.
Not only would the towers have collapsed, they also most likely would have fallen over sideways, instead of just falling down like they did. This would have taken out a HUGE area and killed quite alot more people.
god. you have got to be a gigantic moron.

as with any skyscraper, the structure is significantly weaker at the top than the bottom. if you haven't taken any physics classes, I'm not going to bother to explain this. the WTC was designed to collapse the way it did.

The timing. They attacked just after summer ended. If they had attacked a few months earlier the buildings would have been full of tourists, especially at the later hours of the day.
I think the destruction of the building was more important than deaths.

No other attacks. They didnt take advantage of the shock. If it were me planning the attacks I would have done a few other things, blown up the Golden Gate or something. It was nearly impossible to do anything after 9/11 because of the huge security increases and the general paranoia.
air security was heightened significantly after the FAA/NORAD figured out what happened

Use of Arab terrorists. Wouldnt it have been better to use European or American terrorists? Its quite hard to peresecute the majority. And Ive heard Al-Queda did not lack for American/Euro recruits, although these might not have been willing to kill themselves to attack America.
americans don't hold sympathy for american child molestors. what makes you think americans will have any sympathy towards an american who aided the 9/11 attacks?

here's a would-be-terrorist you probably haven't heard of: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/30/soldier.arrested.ap/index.html

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

educate yourself before you spew some more bullshit.

Well their suicide bombers they are not real bright.
neither are you

the white house and pentagon are not gathering places for politicians.I thought the politicians were gathering in the pentagon in ties of crisys in order to discuss a plan.
They don't?

I think the WTC twin towers were not the main target and the goal was not to kill as much as possible, but to make as much politicians gather in the white house and in the pentagon as possible.
I think the later were the main target.
the white house and pentagon are not gathering places for politicians.

Something isn't working well on this server. How come my reply is before your original post?

Just a few things I noted on the 9/11 attacks, hopefully Bin Laden wont read this and get some ideas :)

Anyway...
First off, the planes hit the tops (Or near enough) of the towers, if the terrorists had been trying for a real killer-blow they would have tried for further down, IE: The middle of the building.
Not only would the towers have collapsed, they also most likely would have fallen over sideways, instead of just falling down like they did. This would have taken out a HUGE area and killed quite alot more people.

The timing. They attacked just after summer ended. If they had attacked a few months earlier the buildings would have been full of tourists, especially at the later hours of the day.

Lack of backups. Apparently the terrosists had NO backup plans, if any of the planes failed, they were gone, as happened with the plane where the passengers defeated the terrorists.

No other attacks. They didnt take advantage of the shock. If it were me planning the attacks I would have done a few other things, blown up the Golden Gate or something. It was nearly impossible to do anything after 9/11 because of the huge security increases and the general paranoia.

Use of Arab terrorists. Wouldnt it have been better to use European or American terrorists? Its quite hard to peresecute the majority. And Ive heard Al-Queda did not lack for American/Euro recruits, although these might not have been willing to kill themselves to attack America.

Feel free to add more, or debate these points. I do realize that Al-Queda is not a rich organization, but they apparently have a good sized member base, and the intelligence to figure most of this out.

This all leads me to believe that the WTC was NOT supposed to collapse, I think the terrorists were just going for a 'Hey, look what we can do!' sort of thing, to make the US feel that it was vulnerable, and possibbly kill a few hundred people (Not to make light of the attacks.)

And for those who dont know, there were some twenty thosand people in the WTC the day of the attacks. 3,000 died, which is horrible by itself, but it could have been MUCH worse.

Again, I do not wish to make light of these attacks, support or condone terrorism, standard disclaimer thing.


I don't think they could have hit the buildings much lower due to the surrounding buildings.

Something isn't working well on this server. How come my reply is before your original post?
you tore the fabric of times :eek:

I'm not entirely sure where congressmen evacuate to in times of an emergency but I doubt it's the white house or the pentagon.

Just a few things I noted on the 9/11 attacks, hopefully Bin Laden wont read this and get some ideas :)

Anyway...
First off, the planes hit the tops (Or near enough) of the towers, if the terrorists had been trying for a real killer-blow they would have tried for further down, IE: The middle of the building.
Not only would the towers have collapsed, they also most likely would have fallen over sideways, instead of just falling down like they did. This would have taken out a HUGE area and killed quite alot more people.

The timing. They attacked just after summer ended. If they had attacked a few months earlier the buildings would have been full of tourists, especially at the later hours of the day.

Lack of backups. Apparently the terrosists had NO backup plans, if any of the planes failed, they were gone, as happened with the plane where the passengers defeated the terrorists.

No other attacks. They didnt take advantage of the shock. If it were me planning the attacks I would have done a few other things, blown up the Golden Gate or something. It was nearly impossible to do anything after 9/11 because of the huge security increases and the general paranoia.

Use of Arab terrorists. Wouldnt it have been better to use European or American terrorists? Its quite hard to peresecute the majority. And Ive heard Al-Queda did not lack for American/Euro recruits, although these might not have been willing to kill themselves to attack America.

Feel free to add more, or debate these points. I do realize that Al-Queda is not a rich organization, but they apparently have a good sized member base, and the intelligence to figure most of this out.

This all leads me to believe that the WTC was NOT supposed to collapse, I think the terrorists were just going for a 'Hey, look what we can do!' sort of thing, to make the US feel that it was vulnerable, and possibbly kill a few hundred people (Not to make light of the attacks.)

And for those who dont know, there were some twenty thosand people in the WTC the day of the attacks. 3,000 died, which is horrible by itself, but it could have been MUCH worse.

Again, I do not wish to make light of these attacks, support or condone terrorism, standard disclaimer thing.



A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.

you tore the fabric of times :eek:

I'm not entirely sure where congressmen evacuate to in times of an emergency but I doubt it's the white house or the pentagon.I think they thought that the politicians would not think it would not be an emergency for THEM, just an attack on US soil (US people), but not on the politicians and that they would plan something or try to discuss between them to know what to do about it.

Hehe, as opposed to the average redneck American? *LOL* :rolleyes:

or to the average canuck canadian :rolleyes:

I am not a structural engineer, but I remember hearing some comments by people who are in that trade. It is likely that the attacks were made on the upper portion of the buildings deliberately. That is why they collapsed. The buildings were designed with more strength at the bottom but not for sucessive blows from above as each floor fell into the one below it. Osama as I recall has some training in structural engineering and apparently he learned from the bombing that was done from below previously.

I am not a structural engineer, but I remember hearing some comments by people who are in that trade. It is likely that the attacks were made on the upper portion of the buildings deliberately. That is why they collapsed. The buildings were designed with more strength at the bottom but not for sucessive blows from above as each floor fell into the one below it. Osama as I recall has some training in structural engineering and apparently he learned from the bombing that was done from below previously.


That might very well be true. Considering all the information that was tossed about after the earlier van/car combing attempt a few years prior.

Well their suicide bombers they are not real bright.
For whch we should all be extremely grateful.
One of my many strange friends is an engineer and a physict, who as a hobby works out the most efficient way to trash cities. I've always been very glad that he doesn't have any political views!

I'd like to take the first post and Our Earth's post and add my own two cents, for I think they both danced around a very important point I wish to call to your collective attention.

One of the single greatest goals of a guerilla warfare group is to force their opponent to take harsh measures against the wrong targets. By eliminating moderate voices, burning towns, raping civilians, locking up dissenters, preventing free speech; any/all/or more of these will turn popular opinion against a government. It will harden their own base of followers as the actions taken against them are more extreme; it may shock neutral parties into line with the group itself.

In short, by upping the ante, the guerilla group ensures that their target becomes an instrument of its own destruction. It may in fact be eradicated itself in the process, but the target will also likely fall or be crippled.

From theory to reality:

Bin-Laden's group is partly a terrorist cell structure; but it has its roots, as many know, in Afgani resistance groups against the Russian incursion there. Thus the thinking behind their strategy shares similarity to both traditional terrorist mentality and guerilla fighters.

For example; a terrorist group could not reasonably expect demands to be met after 9/11. The act was far too large, far too damaging, and cost the US far too much face. As a terroist act, 9/11 was simply crossed the line.

As a military strike, they had hit the Pentagon (command and control) and the WTC (Economic, Morale, Civilian Communications); but as the posters pointed out, no follow-ups were planned, or really possible to carry out with much success. A full-scale uprising is not possible that deep in enemy territory, cell-based structures made it impossible to summon considerable manpower, logistics for such an operation alone would make discovery almost certain.

Thus the 9/11 attacks were not military in nature right? Well...no and yes. They were still terrorist in nature, but military in conception, and a strange hybrid of the two in reality. They best fit in the catagory of "Unorthodox Warfare" or "Asymmetrical Warfare" ; extraordinary attacks that focus on long-term gains, shaking up the globe and looking for an opportunity to arise, or...bringing an opponent to follow with extraordinary measures of its own.

Thus we come to the "War on Terror" a very unorthodox method to deal with a very complex problem; a military/terrorist group with unrealistic goals and uncomprimising agendas.

I'm pretty sure you can see where I'm going with this. The US, in fact, HAS taken extraordinary measures to meet this threat: "The War on Terror" is the label for these changes. How much these actions play into the long-term goals of Bin-Laden's group remains to be seen, but many groups and induviduals warn of the problems that such reactions might have. Its obvious that many have no conception of such tactics or strategy, but such is the nature or protest movements.

I think you have a strong point, and it fits nicely with my points about media and the attention of the world. The scale of the attack put it outside the realm of mere terrorism both because the fear of another was not great and because no demands could be issued after such an attack, and because of the scale the attention of the entire world was focused on Manhattan and Al-Queda. My wording was not as clear because the idea in my head was not as clear, but I said basically the same thing as you when I spoke about the government needing to retaliate in a way that would allow them to appear strong in the face of the attacks. If it was Al-Queda's intent to shake up the world and get things moving by forcing the U.S. into extreme action then the psychology of our leaders in Washington played perfectly into their plans.

I think you have a strong point, and it fits nicely with my points about media and the attention of the world. The scale of the attack put it outside the realm of mere terrorism both because the fear of another was not great and because no demands could be issued after such an attack, and because of the scale the attention of the entire world was focused on Manhattan and Al-Queda. My wording was not as clear because the idea in my head was not as clear, but I said basically the same thing as you when I spoke about the government needing to retaliate in a way that would allow them to appear strong in the face of the attacks. If it was Al-Queda's intent to shake up the world and get things moving by forcing the U.S. into extreme action then the psychology of our leaders in Washington played perfectly into their plans.

Yeah, as I said; you were very close to mentioning what I tried to get across; the concept crystalized in my head pretty much on Sept. 11. I had been studying warfare at that point for about 9 months, so the concepts were fresh in my noggin.

I'm a little surprised at the lack of response from the rest of the posters though. I wonder why that is?

god. you have got to be a gigantic moron.

as with any skyscraper, the structure is significantly weaker at the top than the bottom. if you haven't taken any physics classes, I'm not going to bother to explain this. the WTC was designed to collapse the way it did.


I think the destruction of the building was more important than deaths.


air security was heightened significantly after the FAA/NORAD figured out what happened


americans don't hold sympathy for american child molestors. what makes you think americans will have any sympathy towards an american who aided the 9/11 attacks?

here's a would-be-terrorist you probably haven't heard of: http://www.cnn.com/2004/LAW/08/30/soldier.arrested.ap/index.html

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0112/Eagar/Eagar-0112.html

educate yourself before you spew some more bullshit.

yeah after they figured it out but there were 7000+ planes above the us at that time it took them between 45 and 1hr 30min to get them down in that time more planes could have taken out more targets they did lose sight of 2 planes in the air one was the penn state crash the other was a milan flight to the us it returned to spain they couldnt find these planes to possibly shoot them down so if more planes had been used it could have been far worse

one of the things i did expect of them too have attacked was the statue of liberty the great symbol of freedom

i dont think its necassarily about sympathy because the aim is to cap yourself at the sametime but if you see an "arab" you think arab instead of seeing maybe a white person and thinking nothing of it if it were "american" subversive elements and then they died obviously you cant hit them or retaliate because their not theyre anymore Pooff smoked terr

its like a pyramid you start with a larger base(the foundation)and build up with the layer below suporting the layer above you dont build a pyramid from the small point up(although you could)you need the structural stability of the base to support the following levels its dosent work building a house on sand
*(dont want any links proving you can)

The thing which bothers me most about this thread is those who attempt to somehow link President Bush to the attacks, some even suggesting that the President was behind the attacks, or ignored advance knowledge of them. I regard this as borderline treason.

If you want to make sure I totally despise you, just post this sort of idiocy.

To defend a president who has endangered your family and thousands of Americans by ignoring all warnings is stupid.

better bush than gore

Here's the greatest conspiracy theory for Bush's involvement or complicitness..


http://home.earthlink.net/~killtown/bush.html

An interesting point if true...Bush was at a school 3 miles away from an airport. If they truly wanted to kill him then why wouldn't they just attack the elementry school? Knowing that they didn't want to kill him or Cheney, why did they both run away?
Think about it. The 19 savages took off from 3 different airports that day. The conspiracy theory presumes they would have had prior knowledge of exactly where the President or the Vice President were that day. Unfortunately for that theory, the President was nowhere near Washington DC that day. However, we do know that 2 flights were headed for DC that day, and apparently the savages on the flight that hit the Pentagon actually went for their secondary target, as the White House is really hard to readily identify from the air, while the Pentagon is very easily identifiable. Of course, once it became clear what was going on that day, the VP was immediately whisked away to safety (the infamous "undisclosed location.")

Well, maybe they'll have a more devastating plan next time *shrug*
What would you like? Lethal virus? Chemical attack? Dirty bomb? Nuclear attack?

Panty raid. :)

The thing which bothers me most about this thread is those who attempt to somehow link President Bush to the attacks, some even suggesting that the President was behind the attacks, or ignored advance knowledge of them. I regard this as borderline treason.



So.... certain Americans on this site question what happened that day and use their Freedom of Speech and you call that treason? I call it using our First Amendment rights.

Welcome to America, where you don't have to worry about being shuffled off into a dark SUV with tinted windows by men in black suits because you called the President a name!

At least I think not....

I am not a structural engineer, but I remember hearing some comments by people who are in that trade. It is likely that the attacks were made on the upper portion of the buildings deliberately. That is why they collapsed. The buildings were designed with more strength at the bottom but not for sucessive blows from above as each floor fell into the one below it. Osama as I recall has some training in structural engineering and apparently he learned from the bombing that was done from below previously.

Actually,I remember the tapes showing OBL being suprised at the level of distruction, claiming Allah had helped.

No one expected that much damage.

BTW, find or break out a flight simulator with the towers still in place, I have FS 2000. Try and hit them with the 737, it is hard to hit much below that spot because of the angle of attack takes you into other buildings too soon.

It CAN be done, but it is a hairy ride and even a small jumbo jet is a shitty dive bomber.

My youngest daughter and a bunch of her friends were in Windows On The World reastaurant at the top of one of the towers just one day before the attacks on the WTC. She was effectively "trapped in New York" when they grounded all flights just before she was to board hers and had to walk back into the City when most were walking out.

I didn't realize how deeply all of this had affected me until she walked in the door several days later. I grabbed her, weeping, and would not let her go. She kept telling me, "I'm OK, Daddy! It's OK!" My wife finally had to pry my arms loose! So this issue hits very close to home for me.

The thing which bothers me most about this thread is those who attempt to somehow link President Bush to the attacks, some even suggesting that the President was behind the attacks, or ignored advance knowledge of them. I regard this as borderline treason.

If you want to make sure I totally despise you, just post this sort of idiocy.

Your a true patriot and I support you and your family. I notice you have but two posts so far, be forwarned that 90% of the people that post on these boards will tear you down in a heartbeat for having the beliefs that you do. I don't let it change my perspective on reality, but many people come here and they do change. Many of the people here are young kids or young adults, and they just can't grasp the seriousness of their words, as they want to spew angst, and are not very concerned with facts or reality.

Lastly, you don't sound like a liberal, so your already in a deep hole around here. Welcome to the bottom of the pile, I think I know about 20 conservatives out of the thousands of people here lol

Actually,I remember the tapes showing OBL being suprised at the level of distruction, claiming Allah had helped.

No one expected that much damage.

BTW, find or break out a flight simulator with the towers still in place, I have FS 2000. Try and hit them with the 737, it is hard to hit much below that spot because of the angle of attack takes you into other buildings too soon.

It CAN be done, but it is a hairy ride and even a small jumbo jet is a shitty dive bomber.
oh yeah id lov to buy that and cant you also blow it up in one of the command and conquer games what about this

hope it works bassicaly the whole plane 2 pages skull and cross bones and davids star OR TRY Q33NY in windings hmmmm