NationStates Jolt Archive

Specifically, the memories of the ninety-five passengers aboard Air France Flight 1611, which crashed off the coast of Nice, France on September 11th, 1968, one of many, many horrible events of that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_1611

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

Specifically, the memories of the ninety-five passengers aboard Air France Flight 1611, which crashed off the coast of Nice, France on September 11th, 1968, one of many, many horrible events of that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_1611

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

Agreed. Though you can't expect that in a nation willing to commemorate just about anything.

I respectfully remember the victims of the hijackings -- while simultaneously reflecting that it was not really a "national" tragedy.

It's one of the worst terrorist attacks in history, Kyro...

I mean, not to downplay the train bombings in Spain and India or the bombings in London, or any of the other significant attacks that come to mind, but it's changed the way that people view security across the world for the foreseeable future and beyond.

Ahh, damn it, that is tomorrow! And I've got a job interview... I hope it doesn't get maudlin and uncomfortable. :(

I have to admit, in the interest of full disclosure, that after the first hour of shock and disbelief had subsided and I was listening to the "breaking news" reporters saying the same things over and over again, my next line of thought was "well, this really makes a mess outta MY week." I was scheduled to fly to Providence, RI to visit family on 9/12. So yeah, it was also spooky, given that two of the four planes used that tragic day were from Boston.

I was rescheduled to 9/17, and I dare say it was probably the safest flight I have ever been on.

It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

LOL.

Fretting over past events is the stock in trade for american politics. You might as well ask doggies to stop sniffing each others asses as ask people to stop making a fetish over past 'national tragedies'.

And Sept. 11th is still probably more significant than plenty of other things that are banged on about ad nauseum. It has, for better or worse, shaped the global political landscape for the past seven years.

And if you live in the tri state area, it is still quite a significant date. (Or if you knew people who died).

I remember having a flight... I think it might have been a year and a month after the attacks, and I wasn't so much worried about the flight, other than a fear of heights and such, even after Sept. 11th.

Then there was that major crash soon after and the whole Shoe Bomber event, I think. This made me a bit more nervous. :P

The best way we can honor their memory is by making sure shit like that never happens again. Ever.

The current administration (and its chosen heirs) - who will of course milk this tragedy for their own aggrandizement - don't even begin to come close to taking the logical steps towards doing so.

LOL.
I knew you would. :tongue:

Fretting over past events is the stock in trade for american politics. You might as well ask doggies to stop sniffing each others asses as ask people to stop making a fetish over past 'national tragedies'.

And Sept. 11th is still probably more significant than plenty of other things that are banged on about ad nauseum. It has, for better or worse, shaped the global political landscape for the past seven years.

And if you live in the tri state area, it is still quite a significant date. (Or if you knew people who died).
True. I'm not denying it's important. I'm saying we're going overboard.

I didn't know anyone who died. I do know I was directly affected: the company my father worked for went under because of the economic downturn and he lost his job, and subsequently we ended up having to board with my Aunt Linda for a year because otherwise we'd have had no house.

I definitely salute their memories, as I said. I just think we need to stop doing it AS MUCH, that's all.
The best way we can honor their memory is by making sure shit like that never happens again. Ever.

The current administration (and its chosen heirs) - who will of course milk this tragedy for their own aggrandizement - don't even begin to come close to taking the logical steps towards doing so.
Indeed.

And the man responsible for it all runs free laughing all the way because people were stupid enough to vote for Bush a second time around, and now it seems like they're going to be stupid again and elect McBush this year. What kind of message does it send to the rest of the world when someone responsible for the deaths of over 3000 US citizens on US soil has been running free for seven years now, completely unpunished, while one of his biggest enemies (Saddam) has been thoroughly defeated? No doubt Osama is celebrating seven years of getting away with it.

And the man responsible for it all runs free laughing all the way because people were stupid enough to vote for Bush a second time around, and now it seems like they're going to be stupid again and elect McBush this year. What kind of message does it send to the rest of the world when someone responsible for the deaths of over 3000 US citizens on US soil has been running free for seven years now, completely unpunished, while one of his biggest enemies (Saddam) has been thoroughly defeated? No doubt Osama is celebrating seven years of getting away with it.

It's like letting your little kid brother get access to your maxed-out MMORPG account. Only there's a lot more real body counts involved and nobody's banning the evangelical thugs in charge who orchestrated it.

Bin Ladin knew exactly how much the typical American is shallow, self-absorbed and possessed of a short attention span that needs information fed in soundbites. Why else did he make that tape during the 2004 Election? He knew Americans hated him and would do exactly the opposite of what he said.

I always tell the story that I received the news by sms from a friend in HK, who was watching CNN, while I was on a boat in the middle of a lake in Beijing.

I was in front of the TV within 15 minutes.

9/11 was so impactful because it was such a global event, it was around the world in a matter of minutes. It's a testament to technology in bringing the world together given it took weeks, if not months, for news to spread just 50 years ago.

President Kennedy's assassination was probably the first 'instant' global news for the western world, 9/11 hit the entire world.

It was an historic, certainly tragic, event, it's an imprint on history.

Come on Kyronea. You've obviously got your priorities mixed up here. If anything, we should be remembering the 1973 Chilean coup d'etat. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d'état) Let us never forget those tragic victims of General Pinochet's brutal regime, the US backed dictator who overthrew the democratically elected Chilean government on this fateful day in 1973...

My tongue is stuck permanently in my cheek now

Come on Kyronea. You've obviously got your priorities mixed up here. If anything, we should be remembering the 1973 Chilean coup d'etat. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d'état) Let us never forget those tragic victims of General Pinochet's brutal regime, the US backed dictator who overthrew the democratically elected Chilean government on this fateful day in 1973...

My tongue is stuck permanently in my cheek now

Thanks a lot. Now we're gonna be subject to a Pinochet Blowjob Festival thread from TAI.

Come on Kyronea. You've obviously got your priorities mixed up here. If anything, we should be remembering the 1973 Chilean coup d'etat. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d'état) Let us never forget those tragic victims of General Pinochet's brutal regime, the US backed dictator who overthrew the democratically elected Chilean government on this fateful day in 1973...

My tongue is stuck permanently in my cheek now

Damn it! I looked at the list of events on Wikipedia before making this thread! How could I have missed that?! How?! http://generalitemafia.ipbfree.com/uploads/ipbfree.com/generalitemafia/emo-_facepalm__by_Chimpantalones.gif

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.
By the way, I always wanted to ask, but found it insensitive elsewhere.

If someone was owning/driving a 2001 911, on purpose (explicitly a 2001 to sound like the date), what message would that project? Would you see it as honoring, celebrating, mocking the event?

Come on Kyronea. You've obviously got your priorities mixed up here. If anything, we should be remembering the 1973 Chilean coup d'etat. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d'état) Let us never forget those tragic victims of General Pinochet's brutal regime, the US backed dictator who overthrew the democratically elected Chilean government on this fateful day in 1973...

How many more people would have died had the Communist Allende remained in office? Chile was falling apart by 1973, as Allende attempted to impose his Communist ideals on Chile. You had runaway inflation, you had virtually every sector of society going on strike, Chile was set to default on its loans. The coup would have happened regardless of whether or not the US was involved.

Also, I would hardly call him democratically elected - he only got 36.2% of the vote in 1970 and he was voted into power by the Chilean Congress, not by the people of Chile.

Back to the main thread, I do believe that we should salute the memory of those who died on September 11, 2001. We need to root out any potential threat to our Western way of life, and it is unfortunate that the United States did not use the opportunities presented to them in the 1990s to root out Osama bin Laden.

Give it time. It took a few years for December 7th to lose a lot of real meaning too. It's only been 7 years after all, see how well people note the date in 2011 or thereabouts.

what happened on 7/12/?? ?

what happened on 7/12?
December 7, 1941... (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Pearl_Harbor)

Of course for you guys it would be December 8th.

Ah I see...
Ya - i had learnt it as 8/12/41

Back to the main thread, I do believe that we should salute the memory of those who died on September 11, 2001. We need to root out any potential threat to our Western way of life, and it is unfortunate that the United States did not use the opportunities presented to them in the 1990s to root out Osama bin Laden.

But they've had 7 years to find him and make him pay. What kind of message does this send to potential terrorists?

I mean, not to downplay the train bombings in Spain and India or the bombings in London, or any of the other significant attacks that come to mind, but it's changed the way that people view security across the world for the foreseeable future and beyond.
... to the world's infinite detriment. I mean, sure, my sympathy has always been with the families of those who died in the attacks, but I can't help feeling like their deaths have been the trigger for an immensely negative set of policies and events.

It's hard to remember them positively when acting in their memory seems to be the justification for so much evil in the world today.

Specifically, the memories of the ninety-five passengers aboard Air France Flight 1611, which crashed off the coast of Nice, France on September 11th, 1968, one of many, many horrible events of that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_1611

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

I see what you did there. Nice.

By the way, I always wanted to ask, but found it insensitive elsewhere.

If someone was owning/driving a 2001 911, on purpose (explicitly a 2001 to sound like the date), what message would that project? Would you see it as honoring, celebrating, mocking the event?

I don't think anyone would ever actually do that.

Bless those who lost their lives on that day. Bless those who tried to save lives on that day. and wow...7 years already....

Bless those who lost their lives on that day. Bless those who tried to save lives on that day. and wow...7 years already....

You didn't read the thread, did you?

Bless those who lost their lives on that day. Bless those who tried to save lives on that day. and wow...7 years already....

And bless those who let Osama get away with it and wage a war on a country that had no involvement at all too I presume.

I wonder if people would be a lot less cynical about that tragedy if everyone from the greyhound bus driver that told me I couldn't go on the bus during stops to the GOP telling me to elect them stopped milking it for what it was worth.

Although 11/9 had a large political influence, it is rather exaggeratedly talked about as a disaster. Even quickly browsing wiki comes up with multiple disasters elsewhere where far more people died and yet their lives lost had little impact on the rest of the world, or even their own governments (Burma (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclone_Nargis)). Life is cheap it seems, when it happens in a third world country.

I would like to take this time to remember all of the people since 9/11 that have died or been seriously injured in bathtub accidents. This number is far greater than from any terrorist attacks and are equally preventable by spending hundreds of billions less then on terrorists and we dont have to declare war or take freedoms from anyone. Thank you.

The most significant thing to have ever have happened on September the 11th since we adopted the current calendar was the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in 2001.
How about I decide not to remember the 5th of November of 1605 and instead remember November 5th, 2006, just to be wise like the OP.

And to all of you who felt this was a good day to dishonor the memories of the thousands of innocents lost by WILLFUL ACTIONS OF MURDER......... :upyours:

Specifically, the memories of the ninety-five passengers aboard Air France Flight 1611, which crashed off the coast of Nice, France on September 11th, 1968, one of many, many horrible events of that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_1611

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

People on the radio this morning were bitching that a story related to the 9/11 attacks wasn't on the from page of the NY Times or the NY Post. Not that they didn't have any stories related to it at all (they did), but that it wasn't on the front page.

I just don't get it.

The most significant thing to have ever have happened on September the 11th since we adopted the current calendar was the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in 2001.
How about I decide not to remember the 5th of November of 1605 and instead remember November 5th, 2006, just to be wise like the OP.

And to all of you who felt this was a good day to dishonor the memories of the thousands of innocents lost by WILLFUL ACTIONS OF MURDER......... :upyours:

Umm...ok. Sure, go ahead.

Because who in the US actually gives a shit about Guy Fawkes Day?

Umm...ok. Sure, go ahead.

Because who in the US actually gives a shit about Guy Fawkes Day?American members of Anynomous.

American members of Anynomous.

Ok, who with a brain gives a crap about Guy Fawkes Day?

Thank you for completely glossing over my point and continuing your disrespect.

http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Salvador_Allende%27s_Last_Speech

The last 35 years seem to have proven him more right than wrong.

It is a sad day for both countries. It is an odd thing for the Chileans to share their grief with the people of the US, when it was the US government that put Pinochet into power. I think it helps to underline how a government can be separate from its people. If we see 9/11 as an example of blowback, one could claim that both the Chilean and US peoples are victims of the foreign policy enacted by various US governments.

As Neruda once said when visiting New York, "the American enemies of my people are the enemies of the American people as well."

Let us remember this day. So that we can avoid it in the future.

God Bless those to desire to kill Americans.

God Bless those to desire to kill Americans.

'...who desire to kill Americans'.

Every person who's ever killed ever has had God on their side, except the Jews.

The most significant thing to have ever have happened on September the 11th since we adopted the current calendar was the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in 2001.


What about the Second World War and incidents therein. The first world war and same. Vietnam probably sticks in some minds. The Genocide in Rwanda. The war in Iraq. Korea. The new year Tsunami killed 250,000.....Theres been various famines, floods and killings.

Hopefully, you're just taking the piss.

Thank you for completely glossing over my point and continuing your disrespect.
As I said earlier,

It's hard to remember them positively when acting in their memory seems to be the justification for so much evil in the world today.
We don't want to be disrespectful, but when the crowd that demands respect for them is tearing our world apart, it feels wrong, somehow, to yield to their demands.

We secretly do want to respect them, but we can't be seen to be acting in solidarity with the American expansionist types that feed off of their memory. And I'm sorry to them if this is an act of disrespect, but I will continue to do it while those who mourn their passing do so so in the name of violence, oppression, racial and religious prejudice and philosophical uniformity.

What about the Second World War and incidents therein. The first world war and same. Vietnam probably sticks in some minds. The Genocide in Rwanda. The war in Iraq. Korea. The new year Tsunami killed 250,000.....Theres been various famines, floods and killings.

Hopefully, you're just taking the piss.

Except they didn't really 'happen' on September 11th.

As for December 7th, something more significant happened in, I think 1972, LG can elaborate.

1. Do not compare the weather to a willful act of murder.

2. We remember those events you mentioned with other dates.
The 11th of November for WWI and the 7th of December for WWII come to mind. Though there are other dates for ww2 recognized by different countries...

1b. I also remember the same US military that was busy laying waste to the fanatical moslem terrorists in the Philippines, Afghanistan and the horn of Africa also helped tsunami victims on a massive scale.

I will treat those who died on 9/11 the same way as I treat all others who die. I will let them rot in peace. I will not use their names to score points in any of the petty squabbles between men the world has to offer. What respect is it, to turn a human into nothing more than a talking point, nothing more than a number? We live in a culture that venerates the deceased. If they are treated as a scorecard, then how debased be those who still live?

Do not compare the weather to a willful act of murder.

Why?

Is one a greater tragedy?

Are some lesser victims?

It is the same as the difference between losing something, and having it stolen from you.

1. Do not compare the weather to a willful act of murder.
You think having someone to blame makes death somehow more important?

Kamsaki-Myu, you are my enemy and I will no longer converse with you.

It is the same as the difference between losing something, and having it stolen from you.

Oh, because losing something is my fault. So you're saying 9/11 is the fault of Americans. I might not agree but I follow what you're saying.

Kamsaki-Myu, you are my enemy and I will no longer converse with you.
That may be so, but know this: you are not mine. You are a deluded pawn of mine. And I will break this delusion, whether through you or through your manipulators.

The lives on 9/11 were stolen.
If you don't see that I feel sorry for you.


___________________________________________
9/11/01 - Never Forget, Never Forgive.

The most significant thing to have ever have happened on September the 11th since we adopted the current calendar was the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in 2001.
How about I decide not to remember the 5th of November of 1605 and instead remember November 5th, 2006, just to be wise like the OP.

And to all of you who felt this was a good day to dishonor the memories of the thousands of innocents lost by WILLFUL ACTIONS OF MURDER......... :upyours:

I'm sorry, where did I say disrespect? Where did I say that we could insult the memories? Where did I give any indication of that whatsoever?

I'll give you a hint: I didn't.

The lives on 9/11 were stolen.
If you don't see that I feel sorry for you.


___________________________________________
9/11/01 - Never Forget, Never Forgive.

And the victims of the Tsunami weren't? They weren't innocent victims? They're not husbands, wives, children, friends and relatives of others?

250, 000 dude.

Look, your point is understood but the difference is that this is the first time something like this happened on American soil, that's the reason it's of greater significance to you.

Don't elevate it above all other deaths, no matter the reason.

I don't think anyone would ever actually do that.
Well, suppose if someone was going to buy a used 911 anyway, and out of 2000, 2001 and 2002, consciously went for a choice of 2001? Would you see it as disrespectful to the victims or a respectful commemoration?

Well, suppose if someone was going to buy a used 911 anyway, and out of 2000, 2001 and 2002, consciously went for a choice of 2001? Would you see it as disrespectful to the victims or a respectful commemoration?

I think I'd see it as them choosing what they feel would be the best model of the three.

The lives on 9/11 were stolen.
If you don't see that I feel sorry for you.
If you do not appreciate the equal anguish of someone who has lost his family in a tsunami to someone who has lost his family in an explosion then it is not me you need to feel sorry for.

There is one difference, merely one, that separates this from natural disaster (discounting the obvious scale difference) - blame. Blame does not add to one's grief, blame does not make one's pain any worse. It is merely a coping mechanism, designed to make the person feel like there's something they can do about the fact that they've lost that which they love.

There is no bringing people back from the dead. It's not like "theft", where all you need to do is catch the person who can give it back. There is no universal justice that says that vengeance sets things to rights. There is only the desperate attempt of people to quieten their own anguish and despair. And, okay, maybe going on a massive killing spree might make you feel better, but does it help? No. It merely transfers and magnifies your pain a hundred-fold. The one you love is gone, and not even vengeance can bring them back.

Do you understand? The difference is merely one created for the sake of justifying otherwise injustifiable action. We do not cut a swathe through the middle east to set things right; we simply do it to make ourselves feel better. And that, good sir, is the ultimate embodiment of hedonism.

How about I decide not to remember the 5th of November of 1605 and instead remember November 5th, 2006, just to be wise like the OP.


I think 5-nov-1979 is more significant....

To the almost 10,000 lost since 9/11/2001 and in the gwot, you are not forgoten. To the 343 of my fellow brothers you are not forgoten. To the brothers in arms that i've lost on the field of battle you are not forgoten. To the countless lives changed and lost on 9/11 you will not be forgoten.

I'm a soldier and ex-firefighter, and on the front lines of the gwot everyday. To my brothers you are not and never will be forgoten. And to the rest of the world we (america will never forget or forgive).

Sorry if you dont agree with my views but today is hard for some.
Thank you.

1. Do not compare the weather to a willful act of murder..

emm, yes I will?


1b. I also remember the same US military that was busy laying waste to the fanatical moslem terrorists in the Philippines, Afghanistan and the horn of Africa also helped tsunami victims on a massive scale.

O how fucking big of you. So did the French, Brits, Italians and Germans.

A sample from Wiki

1943 - World War II: start of the liquidation of the Ghettos in Minsk and Lida by the Nazis.

1973 - A CIA backed coup in Chile headed by General Augusto Pinochet topples the democratically elected President Salvador Allende. Pinochet remains in power for almost 17 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11

Thus your statement that
The most significant thing to have ever have happened on September the 11th since we adopted the current calendar was the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in 2001.
is incorrect, Amero-centric and arrogant.

And the victims of the Tsunami weren't? They weren't innocent victims? They're not husbands, wives, children, friends and relatives of others?

250, 000 dude.

Look, your point is understood but the difference is that this is the first time something like this happened on American soil, that's the reason it's of greater significance to you.

Don't elevate it above all other deaths, no matter the reason.

Do you think that it would be the same if your son hit a deer on the road and died as it would be if he was riding in a bus when the bus driver decided to commit suicide and take 25 other people's lives including your son's by driving over a cliff?

Both are sad, tragic, disastrous events.
Only one requires outrage.

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

Totally seconded: and what gets me, is that the ITALIAN media offer more coverage about the Twin Towers' memorials (of course the Pentagon and the other aircraft are quite forgotten, don't ask me why) than about the memorials of acts of terrorism perpetrated in Italy, like the Bologna Station massacre, the massacre at Piazza Fontana, or the killing of the magistrates Falcone and Borsellino.
Ok there were less victims, but the consequences were more important for Italy than the 9/11 attacks.

Btw, the Atocha massacre is also quite forgotten by the media here. Wtf.

Do you think that it would be the same if your son hit a deer on the road and died as it would be if he was riding in a bus when the bus driver decided to commit suicide and take 25 other people's lives including your son's by driving over a cliff?

Both are sad, tragic, disastrous events.
Only one requires outrage.

Yeah. Fuck those deer.

*calls in a national deer hunt*

I think 5-nov-1979 is more significant....

Utterly pointless since they took hostages the day before.

Do you think that it would be the same if your son hit a deer on the road and died as it would be if he was riding in a bus when the bus driver decided to commit suicide and take 25 other people's lives including your son's by driving over a cliff?

Both are sad, tragic, disastrous events.
Only one requires outrage.

That you gave the intentional one a higher death toll even though the accidental ones have higher death tolls in reality undermines any point you're trying to make.

A sample from Wiki

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11

Thus your statement that

is incorrect, Amero-centric and arrogant.
I am sorry but none of those events directly led to a shift in world politics on a scale approaching that which happened after 9-11-01.

Only one calls for outrage.
Nothing calls for outrage in and of itself. People call for outrage, and get outraged. But what good does it do? Will outlawing buses help make the world a better place? Will slaughtering tens of thousands of bus drivers and their families and friends fix things?

You can't make things better on a knee-jerk reaction.

The day I see the US citizens showing ultermost respect and conmemorating the march 11th victims, that day I will show ultermost respect for the 11th september victims. Right now, they have just my normal, bare respect for those deceased in a tragedy.

Today, I do conmemorate and show respect to the victims of the coup in Chile, not for Allende, not the fall of a leftist goverment, to leave politics out of the question, but for those simple chilean citizens that died that day and the days after the events. Both main organizers and funders of both events haven't been punished so far.

I understand that US citizens have more concern about the victims of 9/11 2001 than those of Chile or Spain, but I hope you don't expect the same measure of concern from the rest of us.

The most significant thing to have ever have happened on September the 11th since we adopted the current calendar was the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in 2001.
Eh-ehm. (wiki:chile)
US-backed golpe (and subsequent military dictatorship) in Chile, 11 september 1973. At least 3000 people executed (data:Rettig report), 30000 refugees and tens of thousands tortured (data:Valech commission).
The fact that it didn't happen in 17 years instead than in a few hours makes it less dramatical, but not less tragic, or less intentional.

I am sorry but none of those events directly led to a shift in world politics on a scale approaching that which happened after 9-11-01.

The next question you should ask is why this caused such a change while the others didn't.

I'll wager it has to do with the fact that the victims were citizens of the world's only superpower at the time, rather than Jews or Chileans. I don't think it means that the deaths of those 3000 or so people were more important than the other deaths. It just shows that the reaction was more important.

I am sorry but none of those events directly led to a shift in world politics on a scale approaching that which happened after 9-11-01.

Again US-centric and arrogant, (Chile is at least in a "part" of some continent of the world that is also called america, even if it is South America). The events in Chile shaped a lot of the South American politics for decades, that in turn affected the geopolitics of the entire world. Even then, having Pinochet in power affected greatly both the start and the outcome of the Falklands Wars, or "Guerra de las Malvinas", if you want to expand the sphere of influence a little bit further. Let's try to research a bit more, shall we?

Yeah. Fuck those deer.

*calls in a national deer hunt*

Well quite.

Well quite.

I'm so glad I'm not the only who finds this entire exchange thoroughly absurd. My head hurts now, and it couldn't possibly be the hangover.

but it's getting ridiculous.


Is it? In what way?

I am sorry but none of those events directly led to a shift in world politics on a scale approaching that which happened after 9-11-01.

Really: don't let your (understandable) shock and outrage for 9/11/2001 blind your sense of world history.

1708 - Charles XII of Sweden stops his march to conquer Moscow outside Smolensk, marking the turning point in the Great Northern War. The army is defeated nine months later in the battle of Poltava, and the Swedish empire is no longer a major power.
(this meaning that Russia becomes a major power in Europe)

1777 - Battle of Brandywine - major American Revolutionary war victory for British in Chester County, Pennsylvania.
(I'd say that this could be regarded as quite important both for the US and for world history)

1897 - After months of pursuit, generals of Menelik II of Ethiopia capture Gaki Sherocho, the last king of Kaffa, bringing an end to that ancient kingdom.

1922 - The British Mandate of Palestine begins.
(which contributed greatly, expecially in its later phase, to the troubled birth of the State of Israel)

1940 - George Stibitz pioneers the first remote operation of a computer.
(we might see here the beginning of modern cybernetics)

1978 - U.S. President Jimmy Carter, President Anwar Sadat of Egypt, and Prime Minister Menachem Begin of Israel meet at Camp David and agree on a framework for peace between Israel and Egypt and a comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
(the beginning of the NE peace process)

1982 - The international forces that were guaranteeing the safety of Palestinian refugees following Israel's 1982 Invasion of Lebanon leave Beirut. Five days later, several thousand refugees are massacred in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
(this one might be the reason of the choice of 9/11 for the attacks of 2001, as it might be regarded as highly symbolic of oppression against muslims)

1989 - The iron curtain opens between the communist Hungary and Austria. From Hungary thousands of East Germans throng to Austria and West Germany.
(thus leading to the end of the soviet bloc and to the eastward enlargement of EU)

Really: don't let your (understandable) shock and outrage for 9/11/2001 blind your sense of world history.

1708 - Charles XII of Sweden stops his march to conquer Moscow outside Smolensk, marking the turning point in the Great Northern War. The army is defeated nine months later in the battle of Poltava, and the Swedish empire is no longer a major power.
(this meaning that Russia becomes a major power in Europe)

1777 - Battle of Brandywine - major American Revolutionary war victory for British in Chester County, Pennsylvania.
(I'd say that this could be regarded as quite important both for the US and for world history)

1897 - After months of pursuit, generals of Menelik II of Ethiopia capture Gaki Sherocho, the last king of Kaffa, bringing an end to that ancient kingdom.

1922 - The British Mandate of Palestine begins.
(which contributed greatly, expecially in its later phase, to the troubled birth of the State of Israel)

1940 - George Stibitz pioneers the first remote operation of a computer.
(we might see here the beginning of modern cybernetics)

1978 - U.S. President Jimmy Carter, President Anwar Sadat of Egypt, and Prime Minister Menachem Begin of Israel meet at Camp David and agree on a framework for peace between Israel and Egypt and a comprehensive peace in the Middle East.
(the beginning of the NE peace process)

1982 - The international forces that were guaranteeing the safety of Palestinian refugees following Israel's 1982 Invasion of Lebanon leave Beirut. Five days later, several thousand refugees are massacred in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps.
(this one might be the reason of the choice of 9/11 for the attacks of 2001, as it might be regarded as highly symbolic of oppression against muslims)

1989 - The iron curtain opens between the communist Hungary and Austria. From Hungary thousands of East Germans throng to Austria and West Germany.
(thus leading to the end of the soviet bloc and to the eastward enlargement of EU)
none of these were a turning point like 01 was

my point stands

none of these were a turning point like 01 was

my point standsHa ha.

none of these were a turning point like 01 was

my point stands

No, your point tripped itself and fell from the beginning. Right now it is struggling to regain its feet, just managing to sink even further in the mud.

none of these were a turning point like 01 was

my point stands

1777 and the events in Brazil kinda qualify as just as important.

What with the whole revolution and then overthrowing the legitimate government in Brazil?

The fact that you fail to see my point does not decrease its validity.
The specific date of 9-11 does not hold the level of significance, as one galvanizing event, for any other situation other than the current global war on terror. There are countless dates more important in the American Revolution, for example.

I will not continue arguing specifics with those who wish to dishonor our sacred day of remembrance.

The fact that you fail to see my point does not decrease its validity.

True, it mainly shows your inability to articulate your point well.

The fact that you fail to see my point does not decrease its validity.

It was not the event that was so significant. It was the reaction by the US government that was so significant.

none of these were a turning point like 01 was

my point stands

Clearly we have different opinions: anyway I don't think that 01 introduced such vaste political changes on the world scale. This is why:
The US were regarded as enemies by many people in NE and ME before, and afterwards.
Afghanistan is still poor, still in a state of perennial war, and still full of talibans. Afghani women are still oppressed.
Bin Laden is still free.
Iraq is probabily the place were the situation has changed the most, but Baghdad isn't exactly the centre of the world since the Mongols razed it.
Turkey is still killing Kurds, and Kurdistan still doesn't exist.
The checkboard of NE hasn't changed but marginally (2006 Israel-Lebanon war and UNIFIL 2).

Of course I agree that 9/11 has created the right climate for a sharp turn in the US politics, but that is US politics, not world politics.

none of these were a turning point like 01 was

my point stands

For who? For when?

Since Samuel Huntington foresaw a clash of civilizations prior to 9/11, since there'd been acts of terror due to the Middle East situation already, from Munich '72, to Lockerbie '86, to WTC in '93, it's only a point on the timeline.

It's a point in history, ultimately not much more or less significant than any other.

One might say it precipitated an act of preventative war by the US, yet it's not the first time.

Would the Gulf of Tonkin not be considered as significant? What led to that?

You're bound by time and location, it's only a point of view.

No one's saying it wasn't a tragedy, no one's saying it wasn't significant, you're the only one elevating it above all other events in history.

You're also elevating it above 250, 000 truly innocent deaths, the result of nothing more than a quirk of tectonics, the fact that you think the weather had something to do with it shows your ignorance. It was an underwater earthquake that sparked a tsunami.

The specific date of 9-11 does not hold the level of significance, as one galvanizing event, for any other situation other than the current global war on terror. There are countless dates more important in the American Revolution, for example.Why's the War on Terror so important, in a historical sense? I think you're letting the fact that it happened in your lifetime cloud your perception. I recall you said "since the adoption of our calendar", which was clearly not the case. Your point is dull.

The fact that you fail to see my point does not decrease its validity.
The specific date of 9-11 does not hold the level of significance, as one galvanizing event, for any other situation other than the current global war on terror. There are countless dates more important in the American Revolution, for example.

I will not continue arguing specifics with those who wish to dishonor our sacred day of remembrance.

Sacred day of remebrance. Bloody hell, we all know it was a terrible and awful thing that happened - you lot won't let the rest of the world forget it, as if there's never been a terrorist attack before in the world. But stating that other things happened on September 11th at other times doesn't suddenly make it any less important.

The next question you should ask is why this caused such a change while the others didn't.

I'll wager it has to do with the fact that the victims were citizens of the world's only superpower at the time, rather than Jews or Chileans. I don't think it means that the deaths of those 3000 or so people were more important than the other deaths. It just shows that the reaction was more important.

Yes.

I'm American; I watched the planes hit the World Trade Center on TV that day, and I cried - and I was afraid. I knew, rationally, that this horror was no worse than many, many other terrible events, but this one was happening HERE. It could happen to us. It could happen to us, people who were brought up believing that wars and terrorism and death on such a scale was something that happened somewhere else, far away, to other people. So we sat up and took notice, and we were afraid.

By all accounts, the number of civilians who have been killed in Iraq vastly, vastly exceeds the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks. Those lives were "stolen," too, but we don't get outraged about that, because it's not here, not us. We don't have to be afraid of dying on the streets of Baghdad, so when we see those corpses on TV, it's just a show. It's far away. It's someone else, and it might make us sad if we stop to think about it - but mostly, we don't. We hear about genocide in Sudan, earthquakes in China, war in the Caucasus, and we know rationally that it is terrible, but it's not real to us the way the 9/11 attacks were. It does not make us afraid for ourselves, our families, our friends, and it becomes easy to forget that those faraway people have families and friends, too.

We should mourn the victims of the September 11th attacks, by all means, but no more and no less than the violent deaths of anyone else throughout the world. The fact that they happened close to home makes it easier to remember, but no more important.

Great post, Poliwanacraca.

It's one of the worst terrorist attacks in history, Kyro...

I mean, not to downplay the train bombings in Spain and India or the bombings in London, or any of the other significant attacks that come to mind, but it's changed the way that people view security across the world for the foreseeable future and beyond.

Not really.

You see, it changed America's attitude towards security, not the rest of the world, it's America that's forcing the convoluted laws onto us.

Sacred day of remebrance. Bloody hell, we all know it was a terrible and awful thing that happened - you lot won't let the rest of the world forget it, as if there's never been a terrorist attack before in the world. But stating that other things happened on September 11th at other times doesn't suddenly make it any less important.Ironic how his day of remembrance involves the deliberate forgetting of another tragedy on the same day that had US support...

but we don't get outraged about that

Who's we? I encounter outrage about it almost everyday.

Yes.

I'm American; I watched the planes hit the World Trade Center on TV that day, and I cried - and I was afraid. I knew, rationally, that this horror was no worse than many, many other terrible events, but this one was happening HERE. It could happen to us. It could happen to us, people who were brought up believing that wars and terrorism and death on such a scale was something that happened somewhere else, far away, to other people. So we sat up and took notice, and we were afraid.

By all accounts, the number of civilians who have been killed in Iraq vastly, vastly exceeds the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks. Those lives were "stolen," too, but we don't get outraged about that, because it's not here, not us. We don't have to be afraid of dying on the streets of Baghdad, so when we see those corpses on TV, it's just a show. It's far away. It's someone else, and it might make us sad if we stop to think about it - but mostly, we don't. We hear about genocide in Sudan, earthquakes in China, war in the Caucasus, and we know rationally that it is terrible, but it's not real to us the way the 9/11 attacks were. It does not make us afraid for ourselves, our families, our friends, and it becomes easy to forget that those faraway people have families and friends, too.

We should mourn the victims of the September 11th attacks, by all means, but no more and no less than the violent deaths of anyone else throughout the world. The fact that they happened close to home makes it easier to remember, but no more important.

Thank you for a resounding summation of my views on the matter. As always, you're far more eloquent than I can be about it.

The specific date of 9-11 does not hold the level of significance, as one galvanizing event, for any other situation other than the current global war on terror.
Yet it has significance as the event that sparked the beginning of a whole new age of fear and destruction, when it could have had significance as a real and genuine end to the spiral of death. All it would have taken was a position of solidarity - a refusal to allow evil to beget evil - and 9/11 would have been the final blow in the struggle to end all struggle. But instead, the spiral grew, and all in the demand that blood be repaid.

You can't mourn the fallen until the war is over. When the conflict ends - when people stop dying over this - then I will mourn the dead, and do so openly and without grudge.

I take all of this very sensitively because I lost my best friend on 9/11

He flew a plane into a building

The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski details why it is important, or rather how it will become important. The reaction is important yes, but the key is and always was the catalyst. Pearl Harbor directly brought about the end of the Axis powers. 9/11 will directly bring about the end of radical Islam, or it will directly bring about the end of western civilization. It is one or the other. Poliwanacraca's post helps my point, if anything. None of those Iraqi civilians would be dead if the 9/11 did not bring about the sweeping change that it did, by that logic.
Whether you believe what is being done by US foreign policy is evil or whether you believe it necessary you can not disagree that it is significant and world changing.

The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski details why it is important, or rather how it will become important. The reaction is important yes, but the key is and always was the catalyst. Pearl Harbor directly brought about the end of the Axis powers. 9/11 will directly bring about the end of radical Islam, or it will directly bring about the end of western civilization. It is one or the other. Poliwanacraca's post helps my point, if anything. None of those Iraqi civilians would be dead if the 9/11 did not bring about the sweeping change that it did.Hypothetical. If it "ends" in a continuous stalemate, it won't be anywhere near as important. Nor is Pearl Harbor a direct cause of the Axis defeat. It can be considered an indirect cause, since it brought the US into the war, but you'd have to guage whether the US engaging militarily is straw that broke the donkeys back and that the war could not have been won by the Russians without US military intervention. Quite seriously, even the ammount of casaulties in Iraq pale in comparison to what might have happened had Russia never become a European power.

The Grand Chessboard by Zbigniew Brzezinski details why it is important, or rather how it will become important. The reaction is important yes, but the key is and always was the catalyst. Pearl Harbor directly brought about the end of the Axis powers. 9/11 will directly bring about the end of radical Islam, or it will directly bring about the end of western civilization. It is one or the other. Poliwanacraca's post helps my point, if anything. None of those Iraqi civilians would be dead if the 9/11 did not bring about the sweeping change that it did.

What?

The Battle of Stalingrad, or the Kursk offensive directly brought about the end of the axis powers. Midway, even, if you want to shift the entire thing to the pacfici theatre. But Pearl Harbor? Oh, I see, "they messed with us, the nasty cowboys". You couldn't be more US-centric in your views...

9/11 will bring the end of radical islam? Islamic radicalism didn't started with 9/11, didn't even reached its peak in 9/11, and didn't end after 9/11, as it is still raging on, and will rage for a few more years, at least. If it ends a decade after 9/11, would you say it was 9/11 what was determinant about its downfall, or something that happens after 9/11, or just a gradual fade away?

I challenge you saying that the fall of the Ottoman Empire caused the end of the islamic radicalism, just some decades after. Even better, the Battle of Tours, the Siege of Vienna and the beginning of the Reconquista did, just a few centuries after.

9/11 will directly bring about the end of radical Islam, or it will directly bring about the end of western civilization. It is one or the other.

It's cute that you think so, but could you point me toward some evidence - preferably rooted in what I like to call "reality" - that supports this ridiculously simplistic false dichotomy?

The separate conflicts going on (the second European war 1938-1945), The war in southeast asia(1931-1952) did not coalesce into WWII until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the axis pacts were activated.
In both cases, the sleeping giant was awakened.
If it takes 100 years 9/11 will be pointed to as the start.

Is there any more rhetoric I need to provide or have you gotten the point yet?

Whether you believe what is being done by US foreign policy is evil or whether you believe it necessary you can not disagree that it is significant and world changing.
I assume this is directed at me. And I agree. The response to 9/11 was significant. But that does not make the loss of the lives of the people killed in it any more or less significant than the loss of the lives of the people killed in natural disasters, in wars before or since, or in tragic accidents or senseless attacks in our everyday worlds.

People, whether friend or foe, are all infinitely more significant than our stupid ideas of nationhood, alliance, military power, morality, faith or justice. There is only one question that matters - how do we stop the killing? And the answer is not "Revenge".

The separate conflicts going on (the second European war 1938-1945), The war in southeast asia(1931-1952) did not coalesce into WWII until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the axis pacts were activated.They weren't, if that's what you mean. Japan never declared war on the Soviet Union.
In both cases, the sleeping giant was awakened.Yeah, and in the latter case, the sleeping giant trampled over a country that had nothing to do with waking it up.
If it takes 100 years 9/11 will be pointed to as the start.Question is whether 11.9.01. heralded that important an event that eclipses some of the other stuff that happened.
Is there any more rhetoric I need to provide or have you gotten the point yet?At the risk of repeating myself, you had no point, as it was dull.

The separate conflicts going on (the second European war 1938-1945), The war in southeast asia(1931-1952) did not coalesce into WWII until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the axis pacts were activated.
In both cases, the sleeping giant was awakened.
If it takes 100 years 9/11 will be pointed to as the start.

Is there any more rhetoric I need to provide or have you gotten the point yet?

You need more rhetoric. Even then, Japan wasn't a international threat as Germany was. While I do respect the influence of the US war effort during WWII, I wouldn't count with Pearl Harbor as being the turning point, because we would be placing the turning point of a conflict when it started. The US couldn't make a difference before even battling once, and having most of its able fleet trashed in one day. That would mean that the US is able to win any war or conflict it is involved in beforehand, just at the moment it becomes entangled on them. Of course, said rhetoric tends to reinforce your US-centric vision of the world, and your hard conviction about the invencibility of the United States of America, so you think it suffices.

The act brought about the turning point. The act was not the turning point itself.

also: If you read your history you would find the US fleet was not trashed at Pearl Harbor which is why it was able to dismantle the IJN.

The act brought about the turning point. The act was not the turning point itself.What did Pearl Harbor have to do with Stalingrad?

If only I could talk with my hands... then I could make you understand. Alas, I give up.

If only I could talk with my hands... then I could make you understand. Alas, I give up.Sounds like a veiled threat to me...

By the way, I always wanted to ask, but found it insensitive elsewhere.

If someone was owning/driving a 2001 911, on purpose (explicitly a 2001 to sound like the date), what message would that project? Would you see it as honoring, celebrating, mocking the event?

I'd see it as buying a used Porsche. Never a wise idea unless you're financially very secure.

A gesture is a form of non-verbal communication made with a part of the body, used instead of or in combination with verbal communication. The language of gesture allows individuals to express a variety of feelings and thoughts, from contempt and hostility to approval and affection. Most people use gestures and body language in addition to words when they speak. The use of gesture as language by some ethnic groups is more common than in others, and the amount of such gesturing that is considered culturally acceptable varies from one location to the next.

A gesture is a form of non-verbal communication made with a part of the body, used instead of or in combination with verbal communication. The language of gesture allows individuals to express a variety of feelings and thoughts, from contempt and hostility to approval and affection. Most people use gestures and body language in addition to words when they speak. The use of gesture as language by some ethnic groups is more common than in others, and the amount of such gesturing that is considered culturally acceptable varies from one location to the next.Yes, considering you made use of the smiley that makes a gesture and that I really can't think of any others that would prove your point, and considering that I don't speak sign language, I read "talking with hands" to mean "exert violence to prove my point".

Well I can't really efficiently explain to you the defense of Stalingrad by typing it out when I need to motion my hands to illustrate the walls, position of artillery, etc now can I?

Well I can't really efficiently explain to you the defense of Stalingrad by typing it out when I need to motion my hands to illustrate the walls, position of artillery, etc now can I?Why would you want to in the first place?

Well I was going to explain what Pearl Harbor had to do with Stalingrad... but instead I am going to have lunch.

Oh, well, if I could reinforce my arguments with a small skirt and some cleavage, I'm pretty sure this discussion would be pretty over like...5 minutes after it started. Gestures help. However, you can describe said dispositions of artillery troops, walls, and what else. Some of us enjoy having abstraction.

The separate conflicts going on (the second European war 1938-1945), The war in southeast asia(1931-1952) did not coalesce into WWII until the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the axis pacts were activated.
In both cases, the sleeping giant was awakened.
If it takes 100 years 9/11 will be pointed to as the start.

Is there any more rhetoric I need to provide or have you gotten the point yet?

Pearl Harbour was immediately followed bya powerful propaganda victory, albeit ineffective military raid (Doolittle Raid) and then the Battle of Midway, and Stalingrad destroyed an entire German Army and allowed the Russians to conduct a sweeping counter-offensive (Operation Uranus).

So far 9/11 has produced two military invasions, neither of which have achieved much more than create a body count and piss off yet more people against the West than before. Hardly the same kind of 'turning point' really.

Kamsaki-Myu, you are my enemy and I will no longer converse with you.

Ah, now THAT's America.

If you do not appreciate the equal anguish of someone who has lost his family in a tsunami to someone who has lost his family in an explosion then it is not me you need to feel sorry for.

There is one difference, merely one, that separates this from natural disaster (discounting the obvious scale difference) - blame. Blame does not add to one's grief, blame does not make one's pain any worse. It is merely a coping mechanism, designed to make the person feel like there's something they can do about the fact that they've lost that which they love.

There is no bringing people back from the dead. It's not like "theft", where all you need to do is catch the person who can give it back. There is no universal justice that says that vengeance sets things to rights. There is only the desperate attempt of people to quieten their own anguish and despair. And, okay, maybe going on a massive killing spree might make you feel better, but does it help? No. It merely transfers and magnifies your pain a hundred-fold. The one you love is gone, and not even vengeance can bring them back.

Do you understand? The difference is merely one created for the sake of justifying otherwise injustifiable action. We do not cut a swathe through the middle east to set things right; we simply do it to make ourselves feel better. And that, good sir, is the ultimate embodiment of hedonism.

Point to KM.

The fact that you fail to see my point does not decrease its validity.
The specific date of 9-11 does not hold the level of significance, as one galvanizing event, for any other situation other than the current global war on terror. There are countless dates more important in the American Revolution, for example.

I will not continue arguing specifics with those who wish to dishonor our sacred day of remembrance.

"Our sacred day of remembrance"? Yours, perhaps. I'm sorry, but my day-to-day was affected only in that air travel became instantly worse than it had already been -- a feat I'd have thought impossible prior to 9/11.

I feel genuine sorrow for those who lost friends or relatives in the attacks, and pity for those using the attacks to rally around the football-team mentality that is blind support of nationalism.

Yes.

I'm American; I watched the planes hit the World Trade Center on TV that day, and I cried - and I was afraid. I knew, rationally, that this horror was no worse than many, many other terrible events, but this one was happening HERE. It could happen to us. It could happen to us, people who were brought up believing that wars and terrorism and death on such a scale was something that happened somewhere else, far away, to other people. So we sat up and took notice, and we were afraid.

By all accounts, the number of civilians who have been killed in Iraq vastly, vastly exceeds the number of people who died in the 9/11 attacks. Those lives were "stolen," too, but we don't get outraged about that, because it's not here, not us. We don't have to be afraid of dying on the streets of Baghdad, so when we see those corpses on TV, it's just a show. It's far away. It's someone else, and it might make us sad if we stop to think about it - but mostly, we don't. We hear about genocide in Sudan, earthquakes in China, war in the Caucasus, and we know rationally that it is terrible, but it's not real to us the way the 9/11 attacks were. It does not make us afraid for ourselves, our families, our friends, and it becomes easy to forget that those faraway people have families and friends, too.

We should mourn the victims of the September 11th attacks, by all means, but no more and no less than the violent deaths of anyone else throughout the world. The fact that they happened close to home makes it easier to remember, but no more important.

Game, set and match to PWC.

Oh, well, if I could reinforce my arguments with a small skirt and some cleavage, I'm pretty sure this discussion would be pretty over like...5 minutes after it started.

We have cameras you know...

If only I could talk with my hands...

OOOoooooo.

Forgive us for doubting that anything that happens in one segment of the Americas is always of the greatest significance. We are but the chaff to your wheat.

I will not continue arguing specifics with those who wish to dishonor our sacred day of remembrance.

Sacred? Sacred?! Do you honestly have the gall to say that the blood of three thousand people makes a day holy? Are you honestly venerating the death of innocents? Are you that perverse?

While anyone who lost someone in the 9/11 attacks certainly have my condolences, I don't see how they are worthy of remembrance any more than anyone who dies because of any of the multiple daily injustices in this country. Got shot by a mugger- clearly not as important a death as getting a plane dropped on your head. Insurance denied you life saving transplant- clearly foreign terrorists are more concerning than insurance conpanies jerking dying people around.

Specifically, the memories of the ninety-five passengers aboard Air France Flight 1611, which crashed off the coast of Nice, France on September 11th, 1968, one of many, many horrible events of that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_1611

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

why? Do the French not mourn them ? there is a difference when something happens in some 3rd world country in Africa and something happens in your own back yard. don't get me wrong those death were very Sad and I wish pissed that bush didn't put half the effort helping the British or the Spanish mourn that they did for us. But our duty is to remember those who died here near to us. Do the French mourn our victims like we do ? No! and they should not. Yeah they were there the year it happened and again the next for the anniversary. But it is our job to remember our family not the job of our friends.

Nobody has a problem with the commemoration. Its the hijacking and abuse of it thats the problem.

(Well somebody probably has a problem with it, there always being one etc)

If only I could talk with my hands... then I could make you understand. Alas, I give up.
No, don't give up. You need to work through your own thought processes and appreciate where they come from and lead to, and giving up against us is pretending that it's our fault you don't have an answer. It's not easy, I know, but you'll feel a lot better about things once you know why you think what you do, even if you don't want to change that thinking.

Pearl Harbour was immediately followed bya powerful propaganda victory, albeit ineffective military raid (Doolittle Raid) and then the Battle of Midway, and Stalingrad destroyed an entire German Army and allowed the Russians to conduct a sweeping counter-offensive (Operation Uranus).

So far 9/11 has produced two military invasions, neither of which have achieved much more than create a body count and piss off yet more people against the West than before. Hardly the same kind of 'turning point' really.

Don't forget that Pearl Harbor was also immediately followed by internment of numerous American immigrants and citizens whose only sin happened to be sharing the same ethnicity as the nationstate responsible for the attack. It's a miracle that there hasn't been an Islamic Internment in the wake of 9-11.

It's a miracle that there hasn't been an Islamic Internment in the wake of 9-11.
As susceptible to manipulation as some Americans are, I don't see this as having ever been a feasible outcome. There's no way you could persuade a majority to lock up an entire race of people in today's world, not today and not September the 12th 2001. There'd be too much of an outcry. Heck, there's a huge outcry over racial profiling as it is without it becoming an out-and-out witch-hunt.

It's a miracle that there hasn't been an Islamic Internment in the wake of 9-11.
There was; it just didn't last as long as the Japanese interment.
Several hundred Muslims were rounded up, some charged with visa irregularities, some not charged with anything. The exact number is not known because the government would release no information at all, would not even confirm the detainments to relatives worried about their loved one's mysterious disappearance. Most were released in a couple months, with no particular explanation. This was reasonably big news around Dearborn, where most of them were from, but got only a few back-pager stories in papers like the New York Times; the nation as a whole, of course, couldn't have cared less.

As with the Kennedy assasination, most everyone remembers what they were doing when they first heard the news of September 11. There was enormous sympathy for the thousands of poor souls who perished in the Twin Towers and in the four aeroplanes. Our hats off to the passengers who took on the hijackers in one of those planes.
If it ever happens again, that must be standard operating procedure.

At the beginning of that schmaltzy film, "Love Actually", Hugh Grant's voiceover says something that always chokes me up:
"The people speaking on their mobile phones in those hijacked planes were using their last moments giving messages of love."
It will always make me want to cry.......

Just to point it out but the FBI has not charged him with the 9/11 attacks.

http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

The fact that you fail to see my point does not decrease its validity.
The specific date of 9-11 does not hold the level of significance, as one galvanizing event, for any other situation other than the current global war on terror. There are countless dates more important in the American Revolution, for example.

I will not continue arguing specifics with those who wish to dishonor our sacred day of remembrance.

Sacred? Do you honestly think God somehow "sanctified" commemorating mass death? Are you another person who thinks we're on some sort of mission from God? To do what? Kill the "darkies"? Knock off the macho act, kid. You're just embarrassing yourself.

nobody has a problem with the commemoration. Its the hijacking and abuse of it thats the problem.

(well somebody probably has a problem with it, there always being one etc)

Quoted for profound truth.

I will not continue arguing specifics with those who wish to dishonor our sacred day of remembrance.
Dear Phoenix Militia,
In Australia we have Rememberance Day for our war dead (the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month) has 9/11 become like that in the US?

There is a danger that right-wing zealots hijack these events. Many people are wary of the word "sacred" - which can turn to "scared" very easily.

People die in wars - Americans too. Some (most) die as innocent victims. However, we must be careful to maintain a balanced view.
The US gained enormous worldwide sympathy from 9/11 which Bush squandered when he invaded Iraq. When Republicans look shocked and stunned with their hands outstretched asking "What did we do?" That's what you did boys! You went after the oil in Iraq and let Osama rebuild in Tora Bora or wherever. Those bloody (and I mean bloody) Neo-Cons took their eye off the ball and directed it to the oilfields.

How many more people would have died had the Communist Allende remained in office? Chile was falling apart by 1973, as Allende attempted to impose his Communist ideals on Chile. You had runaway inflation, you had virtually every sector of society going on strike, Chile was set to default on its loans. The coup would have happened regardless of whether or not the US was involved.

Also, I would hardly call him democratically elected - he only got 36.2% of the vote in 1970 and he was voted into power by the Chilean Congress, not by the people of Chile.

Back to the main thread, I do believe that we should salute the memory of those who died on September 11, 2001. We need to root out any potential threat to our Western way of life, and it is unfortunate that the United States did not use the opportunities presented to them in the 1990s to root out Osama bin Laden.

By your standard of democratically elected, the UK government doesn't qualify. You might wish to rethink it.

Also, you may consider that your West centric world-view is appropriate, but I, a child of both the East and the West*, disagree completely. The solution, as always, can be found in balance and moderation, not warfare and aggression. Blood for blood simply leaves us wading.

The most significant thing to have ever have happened on September the 11th since we adopted the current calendar was the attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center in 2001.
How about I decide not to remember the 5th of November of 1605 and instead remember November 5th, 2006, just to be wise like the OP.

And to all of you who felt this was a good day to dishonor the memories of the thousands of innocents lost by WILLFUL ACTIONS OF MURDER......... :upyours:

A swift look on wiki disproves you. For example:


1708 - Charles XII of Sweden stops his march to conquer Moscow outside Smolensk, marking the turning point in the Great Northern War. The army is defeated nine months later in the Battle of Poltava, and the Swedish empire is no longer a major power.

quite literally changed the course of European history, and is reasonably possibly responsible for such things as the USA's current existence. So shut up with your arrogant US-centric attitude, and actually think before you make such sweeping proclamations.

I will treat those who died on 9/11 the same way as I treat all others who die. I will let them rot in peace. I will not use their names to score points in any of the petty squabbles between men the world has to offer. What respect is it, to turn a human into nothing more than a talking point, nothing more than a number? We live in a culture that venerates the deceased. If they are treated as a scorecard, then how debased be those who still live?

This.

If you do not appreciate the equal anguish of someone who has lost his family in a tsunami to someone who has lost his family in an explosion then it is not me you need to feel sorry for.

There is one difference, merely one, that separates this from natural disaster (discounting the obvious scale difference) - blame. Blame does not add to one's grief, blame does not make one's pain any worse. It is merely a coping mechanism, designed to make the person feel like there's something they can do about the fact that they've lost that which they love.

There is no bringing people back from the dead. It's not like "theft", where all you need to do is catch the person who can give it back. There is no universal justice that says that vengeance sets things to rights. There is only the desperate attempt of people to quieten their own anguish and despair. And, okay, maybe going on a massive killing spree might make you feel better, but does it help? No. It merely transfers and magnifies your pain a hundred-fold. The one you love is gone, and not even vengeance can bring them back.

Do you understand? The difference is merely one created for the sake of justifying otherwise injustifiable action. We do not cut a swathe through the middle east to set things right; we simply do it to make ourselves feel better. And that, good sir, is the ultimate embodiment of hedonism.

Also this.

Sacred? Sacred?! Do you honestly have the gall to say that the blood of three thousand people makes a day holy? Are you honestly venerating the death of innocents? Are you that perverse?

And finally this.

I mean no disrespect to the dead. Those who died on 11/9/2001 died tragically. As did the thousands of USians killed on the roads in the same year. As did the millions who starved to death in Africa. As did the old friend of a family who perished from old age. Each death of a human is a tragedy, a loss of something that can never be replaced.

However, sanity is still required. Further killing will never bring back the dead, and the US actions in response to 11/9 are simply unjustifiable. They have attacked unrelated factions, given up on key principles of their constitution, and destroyed their standing in the eyes of the world. A sane and sensible response, one that rose above the cycle of violence and death, would have been a response worthy of praise. Not this continued bloodbath. There is no atrocity so terrible that innocent people should still be killed for it 7 years later. That is, quite simply, wrong.

*For a turn of phrase. I grew up in an Islamic country, and now reside in the UK, while holding US citizenship.

Alright, here are a few points that I feel that I need to add:

The first thing is, yes, you have had worse events such as Cyclone Nargis, the Asian Tsunami and so on, however, as several posters have mentioned 9/11 marked a real turning point. It marked the day that civilian airliners were turned into missiles; weapons with the intent to kill. It was like the torpedoing of the RMS Lusitania; it was the deliberate callous murder of civilians. It is unfortunate that you have tsunamis, cyclones and other natural disasters, and it is downright horrendous when government's abandon their own people in the pursuit of the retention of power, however, this is different.

Secondly, yes bin Laden is still running around free, but then let us remember the following. Let us remember that Japanese soldiers were still running around islands freely for thirty frecking years after World War II - I don't think it would be all that hard for bin Laden to hide in the Hindu Kush, especially in an area that is very receptive to his way of thinking, and with, until recently, idiots running the show (I am particularly thinking of Musharaf, and you probably have figured out, I believe that bin Laden is in Pakistan). Of course, everyone forgets that we had the opportunity to deal to bin Laden before 9/11 occurred, but Clinton, in his cowardly manner, decided that instead of going after bin Laden, to throw two missiles at him instead.

Finally, I find it amusing that everyone refers to Chile. How much longer would Allende (who was voted into office by the Chilean Congress, not the Chilean people) have remained all that innocent. He was a Communist, and Communists have had a tendency to slaughter people for stupid things like the wearing of glasses.

The fact of the matter is that 9/11 did mark a turning point; it was the beginning of the next great ideological war, the war between Western ideals and Islamo-fascism (for lack of a better term).

As with the Kennedy assasination, most everyone remembers what they were doing when they first heard the news of September 11.
The wide publicity and unprecedented level of fame are the product of an unprecedented level of media coverage. It was shown live, that's something that hasn't happened with any other tragedy or terrorist act.

What 9/11 marks is not special, hijackings have happened before, crashes have happened before. Just another step down the road. And wars of European Civilization against Muslim dictatorial and criminal forces have been going on for quite long by that time; Afghanistan-1985, Gulf War-1991, Chechnya-1994, Chechnya-1999.
What 9/11 marks is terrorism becoming an ultra-high-ratings live show, guaranteed to draw attention and create a massive reaction.

As much as I'm for free speech, it's also the media which makes tactics like WTC so effective; whether used by terrorists or internal forces as provocation.

*salutes*

Nothing more needs to be done.

Goddamn, a lot of terrible shit happened on September 11...

The fact of the matter is that 9/11 did mark a turning point; it was the beginning of the next great ideological war, the war between Western ideals and Islamo-fascism (for lack of a better term).
Can I ask you to explain what you mean by Islamo-fascism?

Can I ask you to explain what you mean by Islamo-fascism?

Right wing lazy catchphrase that was used to coin extreme Islamic fundamentalism but of course more often used to describe Islam as a homogenous entity by right wingers in the United States.

Right wing lazy catchphrase that was used to coin extreme Islamic fundamentalism but of course more often used to describe Islam as a homogenous entity by right wingers in the United States.

I was using it in the extreme Islamic fundamentalism sense of the word. Had I used the words Islamic fundamentalism, then someone would have undoubtedly made a comment about Christian fundamentalism (which I feel there is nothing wrong with).

I was using it in the extreme Islamic fundamentalism sense of the word. Had I used the words Islamic fundamentalism, then someone would have undoubtedly made a comment about Christian fundamentalism (which I feel there is nothing wrong with).

What? That's ridiculous. Extremists of all types can do just as much damage to the world and to the people around them. Just because we're us and they're them doesn't mean that our idiots have nothing wrong with them, while their idiots do.

(And as I hope I made clear earlier, I don't even see things as having an "us" and "them" distinction, primarily because I personally bridge it.)

What? That's ridiculous. Extremists of all types can do just as much damage to the world and to the people around them. Just because we're us and they're them doesn't mean that our idiots have nothing wrong with them, while their idiots do.

(And as I hope I made clear earlier, I don't even see things as having an "us" and "them" distinction, primarily because I personally bridge it.)

It isn't so much an us and them distinction, it is a different sort of distinction. Christian fundamentalists do want their ideas placed on society, but they aren't all that violent. Extreme Islamic fundamentalists, on the other hand, want their ideas placed on society and will use any means to do so. If the Islamic fundamentalists weren't flying planes into buildings, or blowing up trains, or holding school children hostage then it wouldn't be so much a problem.

Christian fundamentalists do want their ideas placed on society, but they aren't all that violent.
I've only had my life threatened twice, both times by Christian fundamentalists.

It isn't so much an us and them distinction, it is a different sort of distinction. Christian fundamentalists do want their ideas placed on society, but they aren't all that violent. Extreme Islamic fundamentalists, on the other hand, want their ideas placed on society and will use any means to do so. If the Islamic fundamentalists weren't flying planes into buildings, or blowing up trains, or holding school children hostage then it wouldn't be so much a problem.
So what you're saying is that you disagree with the idea of killing or harming people for political or socio-religious gain? Then why not say so the first time around?

EDIT: My point being that while your goals are essentially noble, you're constraining yourself with the idea that what is being faught against has to have "Islam" associated with it somewhere, and that which side we're on has to be "The West". These are just incidental to the fact that what we want to see is an end to violence, whether Islamic, Western or otherwise.

Christian fundamentalists do want their ideas placed on society, but they aren't all that violent.

Yep, not violent at all. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/abo_viol.htm)

I personally think that if you cannot, without looking it up, tell a person exactly how many lives were lost in the attack OR give a handful of names of people who died who are not directly associated with you, then you are not remembering people, you are remembering the event and holding a grudge and should not, in good conscience be allowed to say that the deaths of these people outweigh any other deaths, individual or large scale. Dead is dead. Today shouldn't be about re-firing up anger and indignation and outrage which were natural and quite understandable on the day it happened. It shouldn't be about rallying the national spirit over the graves of the dead. It should be, if ANYTHING about remembering the LIVES of the people. Not their deaths and the circumstances therein.

To those who lost loved ones 7 years ago in the attack, I cannot say I can begin to understand the significance of this day to you.

To those who offer indignation through association of being a soldier, a rescue worker or even an American, I ask that you get over yourselves. Consider the likelihood that at any time, any of the people who died in the attacks could have cut you off in traffic on a bad day. What are the chances that you would have then flipped them off and wished them all manner of roadside carnage? It's like not donating to cancer research until someone you know is afflicted, then demanding everyone else donate as well. As well, you cannot throw a shit fit at the people who say "It's got nothing to do with us; we don't care" when "It's got nothing to do with us; we don't care (unless we can profit from it)" might as well be the fucking American anthem.

Was 9/11/01 historically significant? Yes. Was it a major turning point? Yes. Was it the only significant thing to happen on a 9/11 in history? Maybe in US history, but the history of the world, even in our modern calendar, is much greater than this one day, even if it seems to be over shadowed by the magnitude of the American ego.

Related topic: hero.

Some people were heroes on 9/11. Most were not. The majority were doing their jobs as they would have had the explosions been caused by something other than loaded jetliners. The term "hero" has undergone a sad decline of value as it has been overused by those wishing to make hay out of 9/11's tragedy.

Fireman who volunteers to go up into the burning WTC 1 or 2 after the explosions and suffers the collapse? Hero. Fireman who handles a hose outside the building's footprint or helps search for survivors after the collapse? Doing his job. Those aboard UA93 who attacked the hijackers? Heroes. Those who didn't or couldn't? Excellent, brave people, but not heroes. "Not being a hero" doesn't automatically mean you are somehow unworthy or even a coward. Cowardice has its own definitions. Not being able to step up when someone should is not grounds for cowardice unless the circumstances dictate such. Not every passenger on UA93 had the physical strength to assist. Not every firefighter at Ground Zero was in the position to do what some did.

Can we please decide that everyone can't be a hero, and re-value this word?

Oh for heaven's sake, will you stop commemorating some guy who got nailed to a tree 2008 years ago? Get over it already.

And what about that Bastille thing. For Christ's sake, it wasn't last week. Don't make such a fuss!

And the National Day of Mourning? Who cares? the Wampanoag lost that land over 200 years ago, big deal.

And that Haymarket massacre commemorated on May Day -- what the fuck is up with that? they're long dead, move on.

*snip*
Well, it is possible that some of the victims were heroes in other ways. I don't know any family members of those who died on 9/11, but I know plenty of people who consider their lost loved ones heroes because of what they did in life, even if they died peacefully in their sleep.

But you're right, to say, "these people are heroes because they were killed in a terrorist attack" makes no sense. I certainly understand the intent behind calling them that, as a way to honor the fallen, but it's just comfort with buzz words, very unnecessary.

Oh for heaven's sake, will you stop commemorating some guy who got nailed to a tree 2008 years ago? Get over it already.

And what about that Bastille thing. For Christ's sake, it wasn't last week. Don't make such a fuss!

And the National Day of Mourning? Who cares? the Wampanoag lost that land over 200 years ago, big deal.

And that Haymarket massacre commemorated on May Day -- what the fuck is up with that? they're long dead, move on.

Your years are a little off. Even the Romans didn't crucify infants. :wink:

It marked the day that civilian airliners were turned into missiles; weapons with the intent to kill.
There's a big difference between February 22 and September 11. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Byck)

Your years are a little off. Even the Romans didn't crucify infants. :wink:

Welll.... well..... the Irish ate their babies! ;)
Or so Swift would have us think. Oh, and OOPS. 1975 years ago.

I will not continue arguing specifics with those who wish to dishonor our sacred day of remembrance.

You dishonored it yourself on March 20, 2003. Profaned everything that it originally meant. Those 3000 lives will be forever remembered as the catalyst of how America is willing to eat it's own dead for selfish, hateful and ignorant purposes.

It isn't so much an us and them distinction, it is a different sort of distinction. Christian fundamentalists do want their ideas placed on society, but they aren't all that violent. Extreme Islamic fundamentalists, on the other hand, want their ideas placed on society and will use any means to do so. If the Islamic fundamentalists weren't flying planes into buildings, or blowing up trains, or holding school children hostage then it wouldn't be so much a problem.

Why are you comparing Christian fundamentalists to extreme Islamic Fundamentalist? Tainting the waters are we? But if we want extreme Christian fundamentalists, we have the Oklahoma bombings, the Unabomber, and those religious Christian nuts who go around shooting doctors and bombing clinics.

Why are you comparing Christian fundamentalists to extreme Islamic Fundamentalist? Tainting the waters are we? But if we want extreme Christian fundamentalists, we have the Oklahoma bombings, the Unabomber, and those religious Christian nuts who go around shooting doctors and bombing clinics.
I have to agree with you here. There are nutjob extremists in every group.

9/11: Anniversary of one of the greatest terrorism acts in history. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat)

Oh for heaven's sake, will you stop commemorating some guy who got nailed to a tree 2008 years ago? Get over it already.

And what about that Bastille thing. For Christ's sake, it wasn't last week. Don't make such a fuss!

And the National Day of Mourning? Who cares? the Wampanoag lost that land over 200 years ago, big deal.

And that Haymarket massacre commemorated on May Day -- what the fuck is up with that? they're long dead, move on.

Works for me.

Seriously though... it really does seem like it's actually just going to be a matter of time before 9/11 does become - for want of a better word - a holiday. There's so much stuff tied up with the events themselves, that already, the 'meaning' is getting lost.

Actually - I guess that was true the day we invaded Iraq over tenuous connections to it.

But, in the big picture - is it really even a significant date? It's far from the first terror strike, even in the US. It's not the first time hijackers took control of planes, or even tried to fly them into important targets (the attempt, what, ten years earlier, to try to fly a plane into the Eiffel Tower). It's not an especially high bodycount, it's not the dawn of a type of war, or the birth of an organisation.

Heading towards a decade after the events, 9/11 brings back the fear and anger for a lot of people. And that makes 9/11 a terrorist 'win', because that's what terrorism is all about.

9/11: Anniversary of one of the greatest terrorism acts in history. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat)

Are you trying to provoke a Pinochet Blowjob Festival thread? Just. Don't.

Are you trying to provoke a Pinochet Blowjob Festival thread? Just. Don't.

You seem to assume that people who support Pinochet are smart enough to click links.

But, in the big picture - is it really even a significant date? It's far from the first terror strike...
I think you answer your own question:

Actually - I guess that was true the day we invaded Iraq over tenuous connections to it.
If for no other reason, 9/11 will be remember as the dawn of "the War on Terror." Which is unfortunate, to say the least.
I think there will be other causes for it to be remembered, though. The biggest hawks before 9/11 had a fundamental sense that the US was pretty safe, even if the military budget wasn't as large as they would like. What's more, the US has a history of thinking of itself as pretty safe, just because of geography. That mindset was certainly disturbed after the terrorist attacks; it's too soon to know if it is a permanent disruption.

It's not the first time hijackers took control of planes, or even tried to fly them into important targets (the attempt, what, ten years earlier, to try to fly a plane into the Eiffel Tower).

Check the last page. There was one back in 1974.

I think you answer your own question:

If for no other reason, 9/11 will be remember as the dawn of "the War on Terror." Which is unfortunate, to say the least.
I think there will be other causes for it to be remembered, though. The biggest hawks before 9/11 had a fundamental sense that the US was pretty safe, even if the military budget wasn't as large as they would like. What's more, the US has a history of thinking of itself as pretty safe, just because of geography. That mindset was certainly disturbed after the terrorist attacks; it's too soon to know if it is a permanent disruption.

The dawn of "The War on Terror", maybe - but not the war on terror, which is hardly new.

The real problem for me - is the nationalistic nature of the response. Not just military response, and not even the random violence against 'people of colour' that immediately followed 9/11.

No, for me - the real problem is that the "War on Terror" is an American brand. It's saying that all the terrorism that preceded 9/11 was unimportant, because it happened outside the US. It's claiming 9/11 as an American tragedy, when the WORLD TRADE Centre was targetted as a preferential target because it's NOT just America - it's the world.

I'm really not trying to belittle anyone's personal tragedies, but the very fact that we all bounce around a phrase like "9/11" means, this isn't about personal tragedy.

Check the last page. There was one back in 1974.

I was just picking data I knew off the top of my head, that was the first one that came to mind. But - exactly.

No, for me - the real problem is that the "War on Terror" is an American brand. It's saying that all the terrorism that preceded 9/11 was unimportant, because it happened outside the US. It's claiming 9/11 as an American tragedy, when the WORLD TRADE Centre was targetted as a preferential target because it's NOT just America - it's the world.

I'm really not trying to belittle anyone's personal tragedies, but the very fact that we all bounce around a phrase like "9/11" means, this isn't about personal tragedy.

Like I said, the US (and I suspect the rest of the world, though I don't want to put words in anyone's mouth) doesn't think of the US as being attacked. I know, there have been many previous American terrorist acts, but none on its magnitude, and most were home-grown. In fifty years, maybe we'll have been attacked more and it won't be such a big deal. A more hopeful scenario is it is remembered as a lesser Pearl Harbor, both in its psychological impact and the military response that was justified with it. What I definitely do not wish to happen is for it to still be used a rallying cry, because, unlike the war Pearl Harbor brought us the join, victory in the War on Terror is much more nebulous.

I'm not sure how the fact the World Trade Centers were attacked makes it an attack on more than just the US. Remember, the Pentagon was also attacked, and that's very much an American institution.

I'm not sure how the fact the World Trade Centers were attacked makes it an attack on more than just the US. Remember, the Pentagon was also attacked, and that's very much an American institution.

Exactly.

You think the targets were random?

The White House - symbol of American Government.

The Pentagon - symbol of the American Military.

The World Trade Centre - symbol of the international trade community.

If they'd needed a third target that was an attack against the American people, they could have more profitably hit the Empire State Building, or the Statue of Liberty (well, a bit of a smaller target), for example - symbols of American pride that don't have the implication of being effectively international territory.

The dawn of "The War on Terror", maybe - but not the war on terror, which is hardly new.

The real problem for me - is the nationalistic nature of the response. Not just military response, and not even the random violence against 'people of colour' that immediately followed 9/11.

No, for me - the real problem is that the "War on Terror" is an American brand. It's saying that all the terrorism that preceded 9/11 was unimportant, because it happened outside the US. It's claiming 9/11 as an American tragedy, when the WORLD TRADE Centre was targetted as a preferential target because it's NOT just America - it's the world.

I'm really not trying to belittle anyone's personal tragedies, but the very fact that we all bounce around a phrase like "9/11" means, this isn't about personal tragedy.

That's the other main reason the way it's played up so much bothers me, the sheer arrogance of Americans. We spend so much time telling ourselves how good we are, how much we defend freedom and democracy, etc etc.

We basically took the fact that we didn't have a unifying culture and made up for our insecurities with one of the most gigantic security blankets of all time.

That's the other main reason the way it's played up so much bothers me, the sheer arrogance of Americans. We spend so much time telling ourselves how good we are, how much we defend freedom and democracy, etc etc.

We basically took the fact that we didn't have a unifying culture and made up for our insecurities with one of the most gigantic security blankets of all time.

So, we're basically Linus?

So, we're basically Linus?

For all intents and purposes, yeah.

9/11: Anniversary of one of the greatest terrorism acts in history. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_Chilean_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat)

Not terrorism, bucko. Not everything you dislike is terrorism.

So, we're basically Linus?

Does this make England Lucy?

The dawn of "The War on Terror", maybe - but not the war on terror, which is hardly new.

The real problem for me - is the nationalistic nature of the response. Not just military response, and not even the random violence against 'people of colour' that immediately followed 9/11.

No, for me - the real problem is that the "War on Terror" is an American brand. It's saying that all the terrorism that preceded 9/11 was unimportant, because it happened outside the US. It's claiming 9/11 as an American tragedy, when the WORLD TRADE Centre was targetted as a preferential target because it's NOT just America - it's the world.

I'm really not trying to belittle anyone's personal tragedies, but the very fact that we all bounce around a phrase like "9/11" means, this isn't about personal tragedy.

I believe you'll find that it has far less to do with some sort of Amero-centricism, or unique branding that created it, you'll find that it's the vividness of the event that spawned its response. People watched the attacks, and, whether consciously or otherwise, people were faced with the prospect of death--something they usually try to avoid thinking about as much as possible. Their mortality became salient. People sought to cover this up in the quickest way possible: To wrap themselves in a greater cause. To embrace the War on Terror stuff. It was a greater campaign, a way for their country to be remembered, and for them to gain symbolic immortality, through their identification with their country.






I just tried to stuff an entire psych book into a paragraph, sorry if that didn't make any sense. I've done a lot of work in an academic setting on why the September 11 attacks caused the sort of response that they caused, and such. Look at Pyszczynski, Greenberg and Solomon for more :)

1. Do not compare the weather to a willful act of murder.
Isn't it the people that matter? In this case the ends are much more important than the means.

I believe you'll find that it has far less to do with some sort of Amero-centricism, or unique branding that created it, you'll find that it's the vividness of the event that spawned its response. People watched the attacks, and, whether consciously or otherwise, people were faced with the prospect of death--something they usually try to avoid thinking about as much as possible. Their mortality became salient. People sought to cover this up in the quickest way possible: To wrap themselves in a greater cause. To embrace the War on Terror stuff. It was a greater campaign, a way for their country to be remembered, and for them to gain symbolic immortality, through their identification with their country.






I just tried to stuff an entire psych book into a paragraph, sorry if that didn't make any sense. I've done a lot of work in an academic setting on why the September 11 attacks caused the sort of response that they caused, and such. Look at Pyszczynski, Greenberg and Solomon for more :)

Actually, it's both. If there's one thing the United States is used to, it's having it easy when it comes to war. We've never truly suffered the way everyone else has. The last time a major war was fought on our soil, we did it to ourselves, and that was a century and a half ago, nearly.

Because of this, the American people do not have a grasp on what war truly feels like. We can't truly understand it because we've never suffered it.

9/11 is the closest we've ever come to that sort of seriously horrible death and destruction on our soil. That's why we react so much, even though it's so little in comparison to what other countries suffer nigh daily.

Actually, it's both. If there's one thing the United States is used to, it's having it easy when it comes to war. We've never truly suffered the way everyone else has. The last time a major war was fought on our soil, we did it to ourselves, and that was a century and a half ago, nearly.

Because of this, the American people do not have a grasp on what war truly feels like. We can't truly understand it because we've never suffered it.

9/11 is the closest we've ever come to that sort of seriously horrible death and destruction on our soil. That's why we react so much, even though it's so little in comparison to what other countries suffer nigh daily.

Quite. Our understanding of the proportion of war is totally off kilter from most folks. And, even in the World Wars, we so insulated the vast bulk of the population from the violence of the war, that most never saw it first hand. A comparatively small portion of a gigantic military machine saw combat during World War II.

Beyond that, the last time anyone carried war to American soil from abroad was nearly 200 years ago.

Quite. Our understanding of the proportion of war is totally off kilter from most folks. And, even in the World Wars, we so insulated the vast bulk of the population from the violence of the war, that most never saw it first hand. A comparatively small portion of a gigantic military machine saw combat during World War II.

Beyond that, the last time anyone carried war to American soil from abroad was nearly 200 years ago.

Indeed. (Though you'll find some historians arguing with you on a technical basis due to the Japanese invasion of one of the Alaskan islands during World War II.)

How many more people would have died had the Communist Allende remained in office? Chile was falling apart by 1973, as Allende attempted to impose his Communist ideals on Chile. You had runaway inflation, you had virtually every sector of society going on strike, Chile was set to default on its loans.
True. The first years of Allende, though, were quite different.

An economic depression that began in 1967 peaked in 1970, exacerbated by capital flight, plummeting private investment, and withdrawal of bank deposits by those opposed to Allende's socialist program. Production fell and unemployment rose. Allende adopted measures including price freezes, wage increases, and tax reforms, which had the effect of increasing consumer spending and redistributing income downward. Joint public-private public works projects helped reduce unemployment. Much of the banking sector was nationalized. Many enterprises within the copper, coal, iron, nitrate, and steel industries were expropriated, nationalized, or subjected to state intervention. Industrial output increased sharply and unemployment fell during the Allende administration's first year.

The coup would have happened regardless of whether or not the US was involved.
From recently declassified info, US state archives: (i'm re-translating into english from the italian text I've here on a newspaper)
Kissinger to Nixon: "We didn't make the coup. We helped them. We created the best possible conditions."

So meh. Given the amount of US interests in Chile, I doubt that the chilean military would have moved without US support and approval.




Also, I would hardly call him democratically elected - he only got 36.2% of the vote in 1970 and he was voted into power by the Chilean Congress, not by the people of Chile.

It is something called parliamentary democracy. Countries currently under parliamentary democracy include:
Canada, Greenland, Denmark, Ireland, UK, Portugal, Spain, Norway, Sweden, Finland, Netherlands, Germany, Austria, Italy, Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Greece, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Japan, Australia, New Zealand.
That is, the vast majority of the "Western democracies".

Welll.... well..... the Irish ate their babies! ;)


True, it supplemented the spud diet. Don't oppress our culture.
http://vimeo.com/1553083

Finally, I find it amusing that everyone refers to Chile. How much longer would Allende (who was voted into office by the Chilean Congress, not the Chilean people) have remained all that innocent. He was a Communist, and Communists have had a tendency to slaughter people for stupid things like the wearing of glasses.

You know very little about Allende, it would seem. First of all, Allende did not identify himself as a communist, nor did he call his government a socialist or communist government. Nor was he willing to use violence against his opponents:

In the KGB’s view, Allende's fundamental error was his unwillingness to use force against his opponents. Without establishing complete control over all the machinery of the State, his hold on power could not be secure.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article568154.ece?token=null&offset=12&page=2

Indeed, Allende refused during the first hours of the coup to distribute weapons amongst his leftist supporters, claiming that the only thing it would achieve would be a slaughter of the civilian population at the hands of the better trained and armed military troops. Something that was heavily criticized by the rest of the communist sympathizers for decades. So, claiming that he indeed would have exerted violence upon others is pretty silly, at least with the information we have about him. Alexander, you are just applying some ideology bashing.

Heikoku 2 keeps trying to remind us of what happened on Sept 11th 1973. The CIA backed coup did not happen in isolation. From the CIA's inception, it was used to pursue whatever the US executive perceived to be in America's interests - by fair means or foul. It was the foul, in particular, that has resulted in so much "blowback" that right-wing propagandists attempt to dismiss as "anti-Americanism".
Guys, you can love Americans and the ideals inherent in so much of American life and yet despise the often evil deeds of the military-industrial complex and its covert operations arms. The fact that other powers have similar and worse deformed and monstrous institutions (look no further than Putin and the KGB) does not excuse those who would try to camouflage evil behind the star spangled banner. Those liars and murderers are the ones who have dishonoured and will continue to dishonour all those values that the US has shared with the world - liberty, truth and justice for all.
Regrettably the good and evil duality goes right back to pioneering days when many of the founding fathers kept slaves and carried out acts of genocide against the native Americans.
My country, Australia, has a similar history and earlier this year, the newly elected Prime Minister said "Sorry" to the aborigines whom we treated so badly.
Perhaps on 9/11 Americans too should reflect on ALL the victims of terror (not just those who perished in the Twin Towers and those doomed aeroplanes).
Remember the native Americans who perished defending their homes and freedoms against overwhelming odds.
Remember the slaves kidnapped from Africa and sold in American marketplaces despite the words in the Declaration of Independence which said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created equal".
Remember too, all those killed by right-wing military death squads by bullets paid for by the CIA and other dirty tricks organisations who were never accountable to anyone but the Executive.
Remember too that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were on their payrolls.
Lest we forget - all the victims of terror!

Heikoku 2 keeps trying to remind us of what happened on Sept 11th 1973. The CIA backed coup did not happen in isolation. From the CIA's inception, it was used to pursue whatever the US executive perceived to be in America's interests - by fair means or foul. It was the foul, in particular, that has resulted in so much "blowback" that right-wing propagandists attempt to dismiss as "anti-Americanism".
Guys, you can love Americans and the ideals inherent in so much of American life and yet despise the often evil deeds of the military-industrial complex and its covert operations arms. The fact that other powers have similar and worse deformed and monstrous institutions (look no further than Putin and the KGB) does not excuse those who would try to camouflage evil behind the star spangled banner. Those liars and murderers are the ones who have dishonoured and will continue to dishonour all those values that the US has shared with the world - liberty, truth and justice for all.
Regrettably the good and evil duality goes right back to pioneering days when many of the founding fathers kept slaves and carried out acts of genocide against the native Americans.
My country, Australia, has a similar history and earlier this year, the newly elected Prime Minister said "Sorry" to the aborigines whom we treated so badly.
Perhaps on 9/11 Americans too should reflect on ALL the victims of terror (not just those who perished in the Twin Towers and those doomed aeroplanes).
Remember the native Americans who perished defending their homes and freedoms against overwhelming odds.
Remember the slaves kidnapped from Africa and sold in American marketplaces despite the words in the Declaration of Independence which said, "We hold these truths to be self-evident that ALL men are created equal".
Remember too, all those killed by right-wing military death squads by bullets paid for by the CIA and other dirty tricks organisations who were never accountable to anyone but the Executive.
Remember too that Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were on their payrolls.
Lest we forget - all the victims of terror!

Thank you!

Jeez! We sure killed off this discussion thread Heikoku 2! I must be the "kiss of death" or something! (heh! heh!)

1. Do not compare the weather to a willful act of murder.

Seriously, you should be ashamed. Don't compare the tsunami with 9/11, they are NOTHING alike.

9/11 only killed 3,000 people. The tsunami killed almost 100 times that. As far as tragedies go, the tsunami was considerably worse.

Seriously, you should be ashamed. Don't compare the tsunami with 9/11, they are NOTHING alike.

9/11 only killed 3,000 people. The tsunami killed almost 100 times that. As far as tragedies go, the tsunami was considerably worse.

Why do you hate America?

Why do you hate America?

It doesn't logically follow that when someone compares a natural disaster, like the tsunami with a man-made one like 9/11, that the poster necessarily hates Americans.

Neo Art may have been merely attempting to get some perspective.

Speaking of natural disasters (and I don't mean George Bush) my thoughts go out to those Texans who are about to be hit with a mother of a hurricaine.

Good luck and best wishes from Australia!

1. Do not compare the weather to a willful act of murder.

Why should I give one fig of care for a mere 3,000 American dead than say, over a 100,000 Iraqi dead caused by Americans?

Speaking of natural disasters (and I don't mean George Bush) my thoughts go out to those Texans who are about to be hit with a mother of a hurricaine.


It disgusts me when people make personal attacks like this. Just leave Sarah Palin alone, damn it - enough of you Democrats with your sexist attacks.

Try to hide it though you may, your reference to Texas (which, as everyone knows, is the home of the current monarch), and 'a mother' (like Sarah Palin, who, everyone knows, has several children) makes it clear this was just a thinly veiled sexist Democrat attack on the (wo)man who would be king.

Why should I give one fig of care for a mere 3,000 American dead than say, over a 100,000 Iraqi dead caused by Americans?

Because America is Freedom. 3000 dead Americans is 3000 dead Freedom, you heathen.

Because America is Freedom. 3000 dead Americans is 3000 dead Freedom, you heathen.

Hooray for dead freedom! It's not like anybody is using it anymore anyway.

Seriously, you should be ashamed. Don't compare the tsunami with 9/11, they are NOTHING alike.

9/11 only killed 3,000 people. The tsunami killed almost 100 times that. As far as tragedies go, the tsunami was considerably worse.
I didn't compare one tragedy to another and say the loss in one was greater than the other. In fact I said, do not compare them. :rolleyes:

I didn't compare one tragedy to another and say the loss in one was greater than the other. In fact I said, do not compare them. :rolleyes:

why shouldn't I compare them? I can compare quite easily. 250,000 compared to 3,000.

As far as loss of human life, the tsunami dwarfs 9/11 considerably.

Yes but it's a bit like comparing elephants with postage stamps.
If we are talking just about the numbers of bodies it's fair comment.
You are avoiding Phoenix's implied point about the INTENTION behind the act.
The earth itself created the tsunami.
9/11 was caused by MEN who were conscious of what they were doing.

Yes but it's a bit like comparing elephants with postage stamps.
If we are talking just about the numbers of bodies it's fair comment.
You are avoiding Phoenix's implied point about the INTENTION behind the act.
The earth itself created the tsunami.
9/11 was caused by MEN who were conscious of what they were doing.

Does that make a difference? Should it?

Is capricious death implicitly less tragic than malicious death?

Is it just that there is someone to strike out against when man kills man?

It disgusts me when people make personal attacks like this. Just leave Sarah Palin alone, damn it - enough of you Democrats with your sexist attacks.

Try to hide it though you may, your reference to Texas (which, as everyone knows, is the home of the current monarch), and 'a mother' (like Sarah Palin, who, everyone knows, has several children) makes it clear this was just a thinly veiled sexist Democrat attack on the (wo)man who would be king.

Laughing. So. Hard.

Does that make a difference? Should it?

Is capricious death implicitly less tragic than malicious death?

Is it just that there is someone to strike out against when man kills man?

I don't know. I'd argue personally that capricious death is the one that's more tragic.

Not only is there a person to blame in the case of malicious death, but a means of rationalizing the events the lead to the death. Motivations. We can understand hate, greed, rage.

We can't (generally) understand the capriciousness of nature. We may know the mechanism behind earthquakes and tsunamis, hurricanes and tornados, but that still doesn't make it easy to rationalize why the tornado "chose" your house instead of your neighbors, why the hurricane came hurtling towards your home town in the Gulf instead of curling up the East Coast.

And so when tragedy hits, we're left with nothing but answerless questions.

Laughing. So. Hard.

*bows*

I don't know. I'd argue personally that capricious death is the one that's more tragic.

Not only is there a person to blame in the case of malicious death, but a means of rationalizing the events the lead to the death. Motivations. We can understand hate, greed, rage.

We can't (generally) understand the capriciousness of nature. We may know the mechanism behind earthquakes and tsunamis, hurricanes and tornados, but that still doesn't make it easy to rationalize why the tornado "chose" your house instead of your neighbors, why the hurricane came hurtling towards your home town in the Gulf instead of curling up the East Coast.

And so when tragedy hits, we're left with nothing but answerless questions.

Personally, that's pretty much my angle, too.

Bad road conditions lead to... 3000 deaths. Can you imagine reading that headline?

We know humans fuck each other over all the time. We can't even pretend to be surprised that it happens - only WHEN it happens. And maybe the specifics.

WTC = 3000 deaths. But it was cold planning. 3000 isn't even that many in the context. Sure, more than a school shooting, but Pol Pot isn't going to losing his place in the kill-em-all charts anytime soon. There could be 3000 people that died on the beaches of Indonesia that we don't even KNOW about, easy. More unaccounted bodies. More missing bodies.

Hell, if the Suspect Zero theory is right - there are people out there that could have killed 3000 people, personally.

Personally, that's pretty much my angle, too.

Bad road conditions lead to... 3000 deaths. Can you imagine reading that headline?

We know humans fuck each other over all the time. We can't even pretend to be surprised that it happens - only WHEN it happens. And maybe the specifics.

WTC = 3000 deaths. But it was cold planning. 3000 isn't even that many in the context. Sure, more than a school shooting, but Pol Pot isn't going to losing his place in the kill-em-all charts anytime soon. There could be 3000 people that died on the beaches of Indonesia that we don't even KNOW about, easy. More unaccounted bodies. More missing bodies.

Hell, if the Suspect Zero theory is right - there are people out there that could have killed 3000 people, personally.

Indeed.

And don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to imply in any way that 9/11 wasn't tragic. It sure as hell was, for those directly involved, and really for many of us who lived in the area.

But I still think that it's gotten put up on a pedestal, some sort of "uber-tragedy" that we're all supposed to unite around for seemingly no better reason than that it's "our" great tragedy. And that some people are supposed to use as a means to score political points. (I'm looking at you, Rudy).

Indeed.

And don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to imply in any way that 9/11 wasn't tragic. It sure as hell was, for those directly involved, and really for many of us who lived in the area.

But I still think that it's gotten put up on a pedestal, some sort of "uber-tragedy" that we're all supposed to unite around for seemingly no better reason than that it's "our" great tragedy. And that some people are supposed to use as a means to score political points. (I'm looking at you, Rudy).

Agreed, agreed and agreed.

(And, while Rudy may have scored well off of it, it was Bush's speech from ground zero in the last election that really made me sick).

Indeed.

And don't get me wrong. I'm not trying to imply in any way that 9/11 wasn't tragic. It sure as hell was, for those directly involved, and really for many of us who lived in the area.

But I still think that it's gotten put up on a pedestal, some sort of "uber-tragedy" that we're all supposed to unite around for seemingly no better reason than that it's "our" great tragedy. And that some people are supposed to use as a means to score political points. (I'm looking at you, Rudy).


Well, its the 'Lets Rally Around and then march over there' bit that worries the rest of us. Internal rallying is fine. Its when it goes on tour the probems start.

I didn't compare one tragedy to another and say the loss in one was greater than the other. In fact I said, do not compare them. :rolleyes:
But by using such terms as "Sacred day of rememberance" you are suggesting these deaths are incredibly important. You have been aggressively denigrating other opinions and suggesting they are disrespectful, when others have questioned you.
Your desire to make everyone else respect these American dead, when in the big pictire, it is a small amount of dead, just shows how you think 3rd world dead are insignificant. You are being disrespectful there.
You are also trying to somehow link the cause of the act, and how it has changed history, to a reason to mourn the dead. There is no logical reason to do this.
Can you tell me what day the Iraqi's can choose as a sacred day of rememberance? Their death count is a lot higher than 3000.

But by using such terms as "Sacred day of rememberance" you are suggesting these deaths are incredibly important. You have been aggressively denigrating other opinions and suggesting they are disrespectful, when others have questioned you.
Your desire to make everyone else respect these American dead, when in the big pictire, it is a small amount of dead, just shows how you think 3rd world dead are insignificant. You are being disrespectful there.
You are also trying to somehow link the cause of the act, and how it has changed history, to a reason to mourn the dead. There is no logical reason to do this.
Can you tell me what day the Iraqi's can choose as a sacred day of rememberance? Their death count is a lot higher than 3000.

I am not familliar with the views of the individual to whom this response is directed, but saying that America's dead should be respected is not equivalent to saying third world people don't matter. Whereas you seem to find something wrong with someone wanting others to "respect these American dead"(emphisis mine), which implies that you feel that it is American lives that don't matter. As some one who feels no loyalty to the American State but who happens to have been born a citizen of the area between Mexico and Canada, I find your implication bigoted and every bit as repellent as if you had implied that a life was less valuable because it was black, gay, or female.


Seven years ago, three thousand people died a needless death. I do not consider them more heroic, more nobel, more worthy of respect simply because they died that day, but I remember that they were human lives cut short, and I mourn their loss.

Rest in peace.

Specifically, the memories of the ninety-five passengers aboard Air France Flight 1611, which crashed off the coast of Nice, France on September 11th, 1968, one of many, many horrible events of that year.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_France_Flight_1611

Seriously though, people, by all means, we should honor the memories of those who died in the attacks, but it's getting ridiculous. People die in the thousands every year in many countries around the world, but you don't see their memories being honored anywhere near so much. It's time Americans buck up, buckle down, and stop fretting over one event so damned much.

I'm been wanting to voice this sentiment for a long time. Thank you, Kyro.

Well said Romulan but you may have misinterpreted Fishutopia's point a little. I think that his issue was with the hijacking of the sacred day of rememberance bit.

The hijackings and attacks on US (and other) lives was not only an attack on the US - though it was primarily. Make no mistake - it was a deliberate attack on the West and on our shared culture as well.
Noone would doubt the suffering and loss of life. Posters on this thread have tried to counterbalance the argument. We also need to fully explore the question as to why they did it and what we and the West can do to stop their side from gathering strength.

Well said Romulan but you may have misinterpreted Fishutopia's point a little. I think that his issue was with the hijacking of the sacred day of rememberance bit.

The hijackings and attacks on US (and other) lives was not only an attack on the US - though it was primarily. Make no mistake - it was a deliberate attack on the West and on our shared culture as well.
Noone would doubt the suffering and loss of life. Posters on this thread have tried to counterbalance the argument. We also need to fully explore the question as to why they did it and what we and the West can do to stop their side from gathering strength.

I may have misinterperated(in which case I apologise), and I haven't read every post in the thread. However, I have heard to much anti-American bigotry since Bush entered office to give such comments a pass, I guess.

I find the political high-jacking of 911 sickening as well, partly because that high-jacking has surely helped lead to an attitude whereby respectful rememberance is greeted with scorn.

I may have misinterperated(in which case I apologise), and I haven't read every post in the thread. However, I have heard to much anti-American bigotry since Bush entered office to give such comments a pass, I guess.

I find the political high-jacking of 911 sickening as well, partly because that high-jacking has surely helped lead to an attitude whereby respectful rememberance is greeted with scorn.

If I were an American, I would be a little sensitive on the issue too, probably. In their haste to point out the US of A's myriad faults (and you guys know them a well as anyone!) critics of US policies and Actions often omit America's strengths and contributions. AND i GUESS THERE'S A TIME AND A PLACE...

BUT HEY! THAT'S WHAT BEING A DEMOCRACY IS ABOUT.

If I were an American, I would be a little sensitive on the issue too, probably. In their haste to point out the US of A's myriad faults (and you guys know them a well as anyone!) critics of US policies and Actions often omit America's strengths and contributions. AND i GUESS THERE'S A TIME AND A PLACE...

BUT HEY! THAT'S WHAT BEING A DEMOCRACY IS ABOUT.

Well frankly I think people should find that kind of non-sense offensive whatever their nation of origion. And you don't need to tell me about democracy. You or anyone else can say whatever you want, but the flip side of free speech is that I also have the right to criticise your views.

Amen to that brother! Liberty is the right to be wrong!

How do you salute a memory?

How do you salute a memory?

Its a figure of speech, obviously.

Its a figure of speech, obviously.

It's a conflation of two cliched figures of speech. It's nonsense. I wouldn't care ordinarily, but it's becoming more popular.

Dear Thumbless,
You can still salute when you're thumbless. You just put your four straight fingers to your eyebrow. Oh I see....you meant it figuratively!

It doesn't logically follow that when someone compares a natural disaster, like the tsunami with a man-made one like 9/11, that the poster necessarily hates Americans.

Neo Art may have been merely attempting to get some perspective.

Speaking of natural disasters (and I don't mean George Bush) my thoughts go out to those Texans who are about to be hit with a mother of a hurricaine.

Good luck and best wishes from Australia!

Apperantly my joke wasnt obvious enough.

Sorry K of L, I didn't pick up your humor earlier.
That the trouble with posting (irony in particular, can be misinterpreted) - especially when it's a serious subject like 9/11

I am not familliar with the views of the individual to whom this response is directed
I'll bring you up to speed then. The OP was referring to another event that happened on 9/11 to parody the exaggerated importance a significant body of Americans want the world to view 9/11 with. The poster you are referring to was agressively suggesting everyone should respect this day.
but saying that America's dead should be respected is not equivalent to saying third world people don't matter.
Yes it does. Where are all the tears for the many more than 3000 Iraqis killed. If the whole world should get worked up about 3000 dead, we would be having a "sacred day of rememberance" every day. But yet, we don't. Cry, wail, do whatever the hell you want, but don't expect the rest of the world to care.
Whereas you seem to find something wrong with someone wanting others to "respect these American dead"(emphisis mine), which implies that you feel that it is American lives that don't matter.
No. I think American lives matter. Just not any more than anyone else. Them losing 3000 is a very small amount compared to all the death and destruction happening around the world all the time.
I find your implication bigoted and every bit as repellent as if you had implied that a life was less valuable because it was black, gay, or female.
I find your attempt to show I have said something I have not, repellent. I am saying all life is of equal value. I can't mourn the 3000 dead in 9/11, without mourning all the other groups of 3000 or more dead. At least without being a first world bigot. Even if I restricted myself to events in the last 100 years, I'd be mourning every day, all the time. I choose not to do this.

Seven years ago, three thousand people died a needless death. I do not consider them more heroic, more nobel, more worthy of respect simply because they died that day, but I remember that they were human lives cut short, and I mourn their loss.
You are the one who is saying 1st world life is more valuable right here, especially as you aren't American, and thus have limited reasons to put these dead ahead of any others. Yes. You who consider yourself more caring, and me heartless, are the bigot here.

I'll bring you up to speed then. The OP was referring to another event that happened on 9/11 to parody the exaggerated importance a significant body of Americans want the world to view 9/11 with. The poster you are referring to was agressively suggesting everyone should respect this day.

Respecting that day seems an odd way to put it, but respecting human life? Fine by me. I personally find a special emphisis on the lives of one's countrymen problematic, but its hardly an uncomon or unnatural response.

[/Quote]Yes it does. Where are all the tears for the many more than 3000 Iraqis killed. If the whole world should get worked up about 3000 dead, we would be having a "sacred day of rememberance" every day. But yet, we don't. Cry, wail, do whatever the hell you want, but don't expect the rest of the world to care.[/Quote]

Beleive it or not, I do mourn the dead of Iraq. We don't think about the sorrows of the world every moment, because we could not function if we did. But sometimes, a particular event draws our attention to death and tragedy, and we take a moment to stop and remember. Perhaps for some of us, 911 can be a chance to remember not just the tragedies of that day, but also those that lead to it and followed after it.

[/Quote]No. I think American lives matter. Just not any more than anyone else. Them losing 3000 is a very small amount compared to all the death and destruction happening around the world all the time.[/Quote]

And yet in the previous paragraph you asserted that respect for America's dead did in fact mean having the beleif that third world people don't matter. You basically said that you cannot respect one and still care about the other. That doesn't sound like you beleive American lives matter equally. That sounds a bit like "you're with us or you're against us", with Americans as the enemy to be dehumanized. I'd respect you more if you honestly admitted your bigotry, instead of playing word games.

[/Quote]I find your attempt to show I have said something I have not, repellent. I am saying all life is of equal value. I can't mourn the 3000 dead in 9/11, without mourning all the other groups of 3000 or more dead. At least without being a first world bigot. Even if I restricted myself to events in the last 100 years, I'd be mourning every day, all the time. I choose not to do this.[/Quote]

You have a lot of nerve to insinuate that I am a lier after you're blatent about-face in the preivious paragraph. Since everything else here is basically a restatement of preivious arguments, their's little more for me to say in response.

[/Quote]You are the one who is saying 1st world life is more valuable right here, especially as you aren't American, and thus have limited reasons to put these dead ahead of any others. Yes. You who consider yourself more caring, and me heartless, are the bigot here.[/QUOTE]

I am not saying that first world life is more valuable. You are apparently either incapable of comprehending what you've just read, or you are lying through your teeth. And I explicitely said that I am an American. Do you actually think you can missrepresent my nationality in an effort to make me look more bigoted and dispicable, despite my having stated my nationality for all to see in a previous post, and that no one will notice what you've done?

Where did I say what you claim I just said, that I value first world life more? Can you provide quotes? Or do you simply assume that anyone who values American life must be a "first world bigot"? If so, you've come close to admitting (again) that you do not value American life, in which case it is you who are the bigot, not I.

My apollogies for the derailment of a thread that should be about rememberence, not flaming. However, sometimes it is nessisary to respond when one is witness to blatent bigotry, dishonesty, and personal attacks. If Fishutopia wishes to continue this debate, perhaps he should open a sepperate thread for that purpose.

Beleive it or not, I do mourn the dead of Iraq. We don't think about the sorrows of the world every moment, because we could not function if we did. But sometimes, a particular event draws our attention to death and tragedy, and we take a moment to stop and remember. Perhaps for some of us, 911 can be a chance to remember not just the tragedies of that day, but also those that lead to it and followed after it.
But that is obviously not what is being asked by the majority of people.Also, if we are asked to choose a day, why does it have to be America's day. Choosing 9/11 is showing a preference for First World Pain. As I said, Americans, do what you want, but don't expect me to cry for you.

And yet in the previous paragraph you asserted that respect for America's dead did in fact mean having the beleif that third world people don't matter. You basically said that you cannot respect one and still care about the other. That doesn't sound like you beleive American lives matter equally.
Good try. I am asserting that all the people saying the world should respect America's dead, don't get on their soapbox for all the other dead, nor do they pay them any special respect. Here's a quote to bring it home.

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

That sounds a bit like "you're with us or you're against us", with Americans as the enemy to be dehumanized. I'd respect you more if you honestly admitted your bigotry, instead of playing word games.
Do you realise the irony there.
You threw out the bigot label first, but you are still the one who deserve it. How hard is it to comprehend that putting up these 3000 dead on a pedestal for the whole world to mourn is incredibly arrogant and selfish. It is the First World saying they are more important.

You have a lot of nerve to insinuate that I am a lier after you're blatent about-face in the preivious paragraph.
There is no about face. You choose to misinterpret what I wrote, as otherwise you have to accept that the call for the world to mourn 9/11 victims, but not other deaths, is 1st world bigotry. Were there ceremonies in America mourning the deaths on the aniversary of the Tsunami? i doubt it.

am not saying that first world life is more valuable. You are apparently either incapable of comprehending what you've just read, or you are lying through your teeth. And I explicitely said that I am an American.
Apologies about the nationality thing. I misremembered a post.
I comprehend what you have written. I think to some degree you are deluding yourself. I believe you honestly don't think asking others to mourn 9/11 is bigoted or 1st world superiority. I think it is.
Where did I say what you claim I just said, that I value first world life more? Can you provide quotes? Or do you simply assume that anyone who values American life must be a "first world bigot"?
It is not the valuing of life that is the issue. It is telling the rest of the world to selectively value some life more bu mourning for them.

My apologies for the derailment of a thread that should be about rememberence, not flaming. However, sometimes it is nessisary to respond when one is witness to blatent bigotry, dishonesty, and personal attacks. If Fishutopia wishes to continue this debate, perhaps he should open a sepperate thread for that purpose.[/B]
Agree about the necessity to respond when subject to personal attacks. Good attempt at a shutdown, but it's a bit dishonest. This thread was set up as a taunt of 9/11 remembrance. It was designed to be flamy. It was designed to discuss "Why are 1st world deaths more important".There is no derailment here.

I for one, am pretty tired of seeing/hearing about 9/11, too.

A tragedy is not something to be dressed up, and paraded about for some sort of political agenda bordering on imperialism, and military conquest, and if you dont think that what "9/11" has come to symbolize to many of us, you may be an idiot.

3000 deaths is a sad thing, but thats less than half of the number of people who are bitten by poisonous snakes in America. Its absolutely NOTHING compared to the number of people who die from inadequate health care, or cureable diseases.

How somber can I be about that unfortunate event when I see "commemerative plates", and coins, posters, etc, on TV for JUST 19.99 PLUS SHIPPING!

SWEET! I can put them right next to my Holocaust Cards!
All I need is an Anne Frank rookie card, and Im set!

The attacks on 9/11 have become a rallying cry for an immoral government and the bullshit
redneck mentality that supports it, mostly out of dislike for muslims, and general douchebaggery. It has become a twisted war-cry for modern American imperialism.
"Remember the Alamo!"
So much to the point that it even became a focal point for Gulliani's campaign platform.

Also, the proper thing to do on 9/11 in coming years, would be to thank a fireman, or policeman, or EMS worker, for thier service and dedication.
Instead of that, we see thier funding cut, and for those who were actually at "Ground Zero", insufficient health care for respiratory illnesses many of them acquired.
THATS how they have been thanked for thier service.

THATS how out government works.
We ignore the people who clean up our messes, and dont take care of them as we should, and instead, wage an endless war in some 3rd world shithole, all the while using a tragedy as a rallying cry.

So, yah, im pretty sick and tired of hearing about 9/11.

THATS how out government works.
We ignore the people who clean up our messes, and dont take care of them as we should, and instead, wage an endless war in some 3rd world shithole, all the while using a tragedy as a rallying cry.

And the American majority populace love it. Actually, they just love killing people and blowing things up. The tragedy was an excuse to act out their hatred.

[/generalizing]

But that is obviously not what is being asked by the majority of people.Also, if we are asked to choose a day, why does it have to be America's day. Choosing 9/11 is showing a preference for First World Pain. As I said, Americans, do what you want, but don't expect me to cry for you.


Good try. I am asserting that all the people saying the world should respect America's dead, don't get on their soapbox for all the other dead, nor do they pay them any special respect. Here's a quote to bring it home.

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

.
Do you realise the irony there.
You threw out the bigot label first, but you are still the one who deserve it. How hard is it to comprehend that putting up these 3000 dead on a pedestal for the whole world to mourn is incredibly arrogant and selfish. It is the First World saying they are more important.


There is no about face. You choose to misinterpret what I wrote, as otherwise you have to accept that the call for the world to mourn 9/11 victims, but not other deaths, is 1st world bigotry. Were there ceremonies in America mourning the deaths on the aniversary of the Tsunami? i doubt it.


Apologies about the nationality thing. I misremembered a post.
I comprehend what you have written. I think to some degree you are deluding yourself. I believe you honestly don't think asking others to mourn 9/11 is bigoted or 1st world superiority. I think it is.

It is not the valuing of life that is the issue. It is telling the rest of the world to selectively value some life more bu mourning for them.


Agree about the necessity to respond when subject to personal attacks. Good attempt at a shutdown, but it's a bit dishonest. This thread was set up as a taunt of 9/11 remembrance. It was designed to be flamy. It was designed to discuss "Why are 1st world deaths more important".There is no derailment here.


Since most of this is broken record debating (with a big red herring thrown in in the form of quoting one morally dubious politician as proof that I and any one else who mourns/remembers 911 is a bigot), I will respond to only the last comment. I did not attempt to shut down the topic. If you wish to continue debating, I invited you to post a thread for that purpose. As for the intent of the thread, I was not aware that it was supposed to be for flaming. I guess I should have read the OP more carefully. My apologies, if I failed to realize that the OP was about a completely different topic that the thread title.

Though on second thought, I don't see why I should be expected to debate you further when you are just repeating your previous points. It would be simpler if you simply admitted that you've bought into the trendy prejudices about Americans all being bigots who think the world revolves around them. We're not all George Bush, you know.

Since most of this is broken record debating (with a big red herring thrown in in the form of quoting one morally dubious politician as proof that I and any one else who mourns/remembers 911 is a bigot), I will respond to only the last comment.
You can try to claim the moral high ground, but it's a poor attempt. You have not presented anything new and have never rebutted a point with anything except name calling. Let's look at the next paragraph shall we.

Though on second thought, I don't see why I should be expected to debate you further when you are just repeating your previous points. It would be simpler if you simply admitted that you've bought into the trendy prejudices about Americans all being bigots who think the world revolves around them. We're not all George Bush, you know.
I have never suggested that. I have had to repeat myself because nearly every post you have suggested what I think, when it isn't true. So again.

Explain to me how expecting the rest of the world to respect this "sacred day of rememberance" when we don't respect many other days is not 1st world bigotry.
We have November 11 to remember those who have fallen in war. Bunch them in with that lot if you want.

I have no special place of hate for Americans. American foreign policy, I do. I have the mental capacity to distinguish Americans from their government. I also have the mental capacity to think all life is important, not just 1st world ones. I can not accept 9/11 deserves special treatment because giving it special treatment denigrates all other events that happen in the 3rd world and are ignored.

You can try to claim the moral high ground, but it's a poor attempt. You have not presented anything new and have never rebutted a point with anything except name calling. Let's look at the next paragraph shall we.

When have I called you any name except bigot, a term which your posts lend credence to? I have explained my possision very clearly and attempted to display the illogic of yours. Because this is a debate based largely on personal values and prejudices, I'm not sure I can provide anything more concrete to defened my possision. However, for the same reason, I'll acknowledge that it might have been slightly unfair to accuse you of broken record debating.

But I don't have to try take the moral high ground. You forfited any claim to it by asserting that respecting America's dead was incompatable with beleiving that third world people mattered.


I have never suggested that. I have had to repeat myself because nearly every post you have suggested what I think, when it isn't true. So again.

If you are not a bigot, you have a funny way of showing it. Of course, you probably genuinely believe your statements are not bigoted, but that just shows how nonsensical your thought process on the matter really is.

Explain to me how expecting the rest of the world to respect this "sacred day of rememberance" when we don't respect many other days is not 1st world bigotry.
We have November 11 to remember those who have fallen in war. Bunch them in with that lot if you want.

Ok, I get where you're coming from. I can see how expecting everyone to make a big deal out of this particular day might be biased. But I see nothing wrong, should the memories of that day be brought to one's attention, with taking a moment to remember what happened and grieve for those who died, in the same way that hearing a sad story on the evening news causes me to feel sympathy for those involved. And I see nothing wrong with wanting others to respect that, even if they don't share your sentiments. Doing so does not denigrate or lessen the suffering of others. If something, some place or date reminds me of their suffering, as so often is the case, then I may take a moment to mourn for them.

I have no special place of hate for Americans. American foreign policy, I do. I have the mental capacity to distinguish Americans from their government. I also have the mental capacity to think all life is important, not just 1st world ones. I can not accept 9/11 deserves special treatment because giving it special treatment denigrates all other events that happen in the 3rd world and are ignored.

Implying I suppose that I do not posses said mental capacity? As for your high-minded words, your previous statements (specifically that respecting America's dead is equivalent to thinking that third world people don't matter) reveal either blatant dishonesty or a state of mental confusion. Additionally, I would note that you never worry about other first world deaths being ignored because of respect or rememberance of 911. This reinforces the sense that it is not the valuing of all life equally that is your real concern, but rather the placing of third world life above first world life in value.

But I don't have to try take the moral high ground. You forfited any claim to it by asserting that respecting America's dead was incompatable with beleiving that third world people mattered.
Again, a misrepresentation. I did not claim that you didn't think 3rd world people mattered. I claimed that you cared significantly more for the American dead, and are asking the rest of the world to do so.
Asking the rest of the world to make a bid deal of 9/11 is giving those deaths an honoured position. It does not mean that you fail to care for 3rd world deaths, but it shows that you care more for American deaths, and want everyone else to do so.
Ok, I get where you're coming from. I can see how expecting everyone to make a big deal out of this particular day might be biased.
We're getting somewhere.
But I see nothing wrong, should the memories of that day be brought to one's attention, with taking a moment to remember what happened and grieve for those who died, in the same way that hearing a sad story on the evening news causes me to feel sympathy for those involved. And I see nothing wrong with wanting others to respect that, even if they don't share your sentiments.
You personally remembering them, and asking people with a significant connection to them to remember, I agree. Remember, mourn together, hug, buy commemorative snow globes, whatever.
Doing so does not denigrate or lessen the suffering of others
As soon as you want other countries to respect this day, when the US reaction to this day has caused a lot more than 3000 dead around the world, and much more horrible things happen all the time, it is sheer arrogance. It is a slap in the face to any country that has lost tens of thousands of people in natural disasters, wars, or even worse, all those deaths caused by brutal tyrranical regimes supported by the US.
Implying I suppose that I do not posses said mental capacity?
That wasn't the implication. You seem to have this belief that I haven't thought about this. That it is a kneejerk hate America response. I am telling you it isn't. I have really thought about this, and thought about how we are meant to care a lot for 1st world deaths, but not third world deaths.
As for your high-minded words, your previous statements (specifically that respecting America's dead is equivalent to thinking that third world people don't matter) reveal either blatant dishonesty or a state of mental confusion.
I'm in a state of mental confusion now reading that. WTF? You have taken a huge jump from what I've written and made gross assumptions. Read what I write. Really read it. Read the words. Don't assume whatever you've been assuming.
Additionally, I would note that you never worry about other first world deaths being ignored because of respect or rememberance of 911. This reinforces the sense that it is not the valuing of all life equally that is your real concern, but rather the placing of third world life above first world life in value.
We all know in media, 1st world deaths are given more credence. I just want some balance. I'll hear about 4 American dying when hiking, before I hear about 100 dead Africans in a mud slide. I don't want the 3rd world put on top, I just want balance.

And the American majority populace love it. Actually, they just love killing people and blowing things up. The tragedy was an excuse to act out their hatred.

*sarcasm* Yeah thats because America is the devil right? They have glowing red eyes and horns sticking out their head. You can smell the putrid stench of death upon every one of them right? *end sarcasm*

What a hate filled thing to say. You could disagree with their policy and claim its taking more of their and/or other peoples lives then other alternatives could. You may wish to claim that their was no reason at all to launch the military actions under George bush.

But please dont try and suggest that the majority of Americans just love to kill people.

Fishutopia is right in showing the hypocrisy of that one day of death to the rest of the horrible mass deaths that have occurred in history.

But it is at least natural to remember your own. For many New Yorkers and Americans in general this was the first day that people they associated with died in one single event.

When a bigger disaster occurs I am sure they will remember that instead. There is a much closer relevance for 9/11 to Americans than any death overseas.

But out of sight out of mind right? When is the last time we had a day to mourn all those who starve to death, the people is South Africa under genocide, the huge numbers of executions in China or the diseases and anarchy in Africa and the middle east.

Mass events sink into peoples memory. Especially if they never thought the event would happen. In many ways i wouldnt raise an eyebrow to hear that an Ethiopian child died last night of starvation. I would sadly expect it. Its what happens in this screwed up world of ours. Its not in the news at all as the event has occurred over decades.

And the American majority populace love it. Actually, they just love killing people and blowing things up. The tragedy was an excuse to act out their hatred.

[/generalizing]

*sarcasm* Yeah thats because America is the devil right? They have glowing red eyes and horns sticking out their head. You can smell the putrid stench of death upon every one of them right? *end sarcasm*

What a hate filled thing to say.

I think you missed a line...

I think you missed a line...

I think so too.

But then I remember that the likes of Ann Coulter and other "kill them all!!!" types have sizable audiences, and I'm left wondering if I'm that off. Not just Americans, but humans as a species.