8yrs on from 911…and what have we achieved ?

I’m just going to say what I think and I ma not aiming this to anyone.

People have to remember that the terrorists who killed all those innocent Americans on 9/11 were NOT your typical Islamic person. They were people who believed it was their mission to die for their God – ” Allah akbah” – in god we trust.

These people saw their “mission” to open up a message of fear, hate and anxiety throughout the world which are the three issues that cause so many problems in todays society.

I personally don’t agree with earlier comments on christianty as some will know that I’m a catholic but I don’t push my thoughts to other people as people think ALL Christians do.

However; I would say regretfully that religion spawns more fight that their strive for good and harmony – linking back to the extreme religion people who have sadly caused so much hurt to people.

I can tell you though, I’m in the US at the moment and as harsh as this sounds I didn’t hear a single American mention what yesturday was.

But none were done quite on the scale of 9-11. I doubt if 3000 Londoners were ever killed on one night (with the possible exception of the height of the Blitz).

People from over 90 countries died in the attacks on 11 September 2001, (including 67 British nationals and 16 foreign nationals with close British ties) not just Americans. I know you didn’t explicitly state otherwise, but the implication seemed clear.

And I’d argue that the Basque and Irish campaings were more of a civil war than a concerted attack by an outside group.
Likewise the Algerian incidents in France were in response to their policy towards a colony…a colonial uprising (which the UK and other European colonial poweres also faced in many places postwar).
IMHO, they had more in common with the UK-Irish situation than 9-11.
The German (and Italian) campaigns were by “home grown” terrorists, like the Baader-Meinhof gang and Red Brigades, etc. Again not a foreign group.

It’s not like you to indulge in special pleading, Mr B. 🙁

The victims of ETA or Red Brigade murders are every bit as dead as those murdered in the World Trade Centre, and the lives of their friends and families every bit as blighted.

One could argue that the cumulative effect of a long, drawn out campaign of such atrocities (whether you choose to dismiss them as a “civil war” or not – as if that somehow made a difference) is even more corrosively traumatic than a single high-profile atrocity.

Europe is lucky that nothing on an equal scale has happened there. Perhaps if it does, the tone of your comments may change.

The tone of who’s comments, mine? The tone of which comments bother you exactly?

Remember what happened on 9-11 was nothing less than an act of war…aimed primarily at civilian targets. You can understand that many Americans were a bit miffed about that.

Well it wasn’t really an act of conventional war was it, although shocking, a terrorist attack by such a small group cannot really be an act of war. I think the perpetrators hoped they might start some sort of delusional holy-war and in that I think they partially succeeded.

And I can perfectly understand how outraged the US public must have felt about the attack but I think the problem that the US administration was left with was twofold. Firstly the perpetrators were beyond justice; they were dead, well most of them anyway and those that weren’t couldn’t be found. Secondly as the world’s only remaining superpower with an astonishing global capability there wasn’t a conventional enemy (like Japan or Germany) to go to war against…..and smite, as such a superpower surely would.

And the US administration had to act, as I’m sure that public outrage demanded it, and if the current administration didn’t act they could kiss any thoughts of re-election goodbye.

So, what to do? Well there was the half-finished business in Iraq that somehow could be linked to 9/11 and the certainty that Iraq was developing WMD.

Of course that’s just my opinion. I don’t think it makes me anti-American, but it does mean that I disagree strongly with many aspects of US foreign-policy in the wake of 9/11. Mind you not nearly as p^ssed as I am about British foreign-policy post-9/11!

And no, I don’t think for a second that any of the victims of 9/11 (whatever their nationality) ‘deserved or asked for it’, nor do I feel that about the victims of any other terrorist attack on US or other western targets.

But I do think that if the rational behind 9/11 was to stir up anti-American feeling in the Moslem world then that aim was achieved better than they could have possibly hoped, and what is more, most of that aim was achieved by the US reaction to 9/11…

…maybe that’s what the terrorists planned all along?

Terrorism wasn’t invented on the 11th of September 2001, Mr B.

History was one of my majors at university..so I’m vaguely aware of that. But thanks for the reminder. 🙂

Ireland, the UK, France, West Germany, Spain and Italy have all suffered from sustained and bloody terrorist campaigns since WW2, quite apart from the more recent mass-murders in London and Madrid.

But none were done quite on the scale of 9-11. I doubt if 3000 Londoners were ever killed on one night (with the possible exception of the height of the Blitz).
And I’d argue that the Basque and Irish campaings were more of a civil war than a concerted attack by an outside group.
Likewise the Algerian incidents in France were in response to their policy towards a colony…a colonial uprising (which the UK and other European colonial poweres also faced in many places postwar).
IMHO, they had more in common with the UK-Irish situation than 9-11.
The German (and Italian) campaigns were by “home grown” terrorists, like the Baader-Meinhof gang and Red Brigades, etc. Again not a foreign group.

Why

do so many people outside Europe forget this?

Many of us don’t…but that really wasn’t the present topic.:rolleyes:

Europe is lucky that nothing on an equal scale has happened there.
Perhaps if it does, the tone of your comments may change.

Terrorism wasn’t invented on the 11th of September 2001, Mr B.

Ireland, the UK, France, West Germany, Spain and Italy have all suffered from sustained and bloody terrorist campaigns since WW2, quite apart from the more recent mass-murders in London and Madrid.

Why do so many people outside Europe forget this?

Just a point…

Remember what happened on 9-11 was nothing less than an act of war…aimed primarily at civilian targets.

You can understand that many Americans were a bit miffed about that.
(Even the Japanese on Dec. 7, 1941 had the manners to primarily attack military targets).
It doesn’t do any good to rationalize it…that the “west”, Americans, or Christians somehow “asked’ for or deserved it.
I don’t believe Britain and France turned the other cheek when acts of war were committed against it by Germany twice in the last century.

Europe is lucky that nothing on an equal scale has happened there.
Perhaps if it does, the tone of your comments may change.

But Christians have been like that since before the Spanish inquisition.

“Nobody mention the Spanish inquisition!”

There’s a few Christians on the lunatic bus too. One only has to see the brainless idiots on the Godcrap channels on SkyTV. The sort that listen to this only do so because Psychiatry is too expensive, or they can’t maintain a real friendship. The sort that spout it are the Davidian type of mentally ill extremist.

We will not cease until these extremists and thier supporters submit to the righteous and realise that they; their belief system (Or the tangent the idiots seem to read in it); their ideals, are absolutely wrong. That’s the simplicity of it. It is you that doesn’t seem to get it. This war will not stop until it happens. The West and Israel are getting a bit sick of it, well this time we are going to finish it.

We will not cease until these extremists and thier supporters submit to the righteous and realise that they; their belief system (Or the tangent the idiots seem to read in it); their ideals, are absolutely wrong. That’s the simplicity of it.

But Christians have been like that since before the Spanish inquisition.

I’m sure that’s exactly what the mourners said at the funerals.

Every incident like this is a recruiting windfall for the extremists.

You just don’t get it, do you? 🙁

We will not cease until these extremists and thier supporters submit to the righteous and realise that they; their belief system (Or the tangent the idiots seem to read in it); their ideals, are absolutely wrong. That’s the simplicity of it. It is you that doesn’t seem to get it. This war will not stop until it happens. The West and Israel are getting a bit sick of it, well this time we are going to finish it.
I spent a lot of time in the Israel section of DSEi today. Superb, they won’t be listening to UN or any other paper tiger next time the Hezzers start :-).

The US bombed the wrong people, but very accurately. Mistakes will always happen, it’s the info and intel where the mistakes are made.

I’m sure that’s exactly what the mourners said at the funerals.

Every incident like this is a recruiting windfall for the extremists.

You just don’t get it, do you? 🙁

Since when is an LGB aimed at “Any” people. We can hit within a metre from 40,000 feet. I call that very selective.

The US bombed the wrong people, but very accurately.

Precisely my point when you claimed ‘we should have done more from the air. A bomb-truck with a shedful of LGBs is a far better method than walking sand.’

It doesn’t matter how accurately you can drop a LGB the ‘good guys’ have got to hit the right people and the ‘bad guys’ know that and so are unlikely to want to get very far from the civilian population; and that is the reason we are fighting the war (or rather insurgency) we are fighting in Afghanistan.

So British soldiers will still be ‘walking sand’ and will still be taking casualties no matter how accurately we can drop our bombs.

Mistakes will always happen, it’s the info and intel where the mistakes are made.

It doesn’t really matter whether mistakes were made, or where they were made, if civilians die it will not be difficult for religious extremists who are trying to start a holy-war to rally followers to carry out acts of terror as British citizens have been doing against British (or American/International) targets. And that’s your problem.

Don’t get me wrong I’m not arguing for the sake of it (it does seem to be ‘open season’ on Old Shape! :o) but we must be realistic about what can be achieved and what should (or should not) be attempted.

Personally I don’t think there is much danger of a global holy-war, despite what some extremists (on all sides) would want, as there are enough intelligent people (just) to realise some of the glaring problems with that theory (or aim).

For starters the continuing violence in Iraq seems mainly to be Muslim against Muslim. Now I know there is the argument that the violence has only been possible since the west removed Saddam Hussein from power but that doesn’t really work does it?

‘Yes your honour; I had to rape her…..she was vulnerable!’ :rolleyes:

Also one of the British terrorists who attacked Glasgow Airport had worked as a doctor in Iraq under Saddam Hussein and had apparently been influenced by the suffering and death of thousands of Iraqi civilians due to the UN embargo…

…but since the UN never embargoed food or medicine what exactly were they dying of? :confused:

A far better way of doing what exactly…..killing people, any people?

That’s pretty close to ‘kill them all and let god sort them out!’ and probably pretty close to what the planners of 9/11 were thinking.

How exactly are you going to make sure that you are only dropping bombs on the enemy combatants? Yes, a LGB is very accurate but I seem to remember that the US dropped a LGB on a wedding in Afghanistan a year or so ago.

All you would achieve is totally alienating everybody in Afghanistan and giving more reason for British citizens to carry out suicide attacks in Britain.

Since when is an LGB aimed at “Any” people. One doesn’t waste a $250k piece of ordnance on somebody that isn’t a threat. We can hit within a metre from 40,000 feet. Far more accurately if we target somebodies mobile telephone signal (Not with LGB obviously, a more complicated piece of kit is needed). I call that very selective. The US bombed the wrong people, but very accurately. Mistakes will always happen, it’s the info and intel where the mistakes are made.

I’m at DSEI tomorrow, with all the other Warmongers. Very at home 🙂

I couldn’t agree more.
Four of the fertiliser bomb plotters were British Muslims from my town.We have a 10% asian population and excellent race relations.
These young men would have had white friends at school,supported the same football teams and hung out together at the weekend.Their parents would have been busy working hard to make a living.
Then something happened to make them hate the country which had given them every advantage so much that they wanted to murder its citizens,any citizens,indiscriminately.
Can anyone explain why ?

You’re assuming the people whi carry out terror attacks think rationally.

Don’t they?

Saudi-born terrorists launch the 9/11 attacks…..so the US-led coalition attacks Saddam Hussein in Iraq and the Taliban in Afghanistan.

As a response to these invasions British citizens plan or carry out terrorist attacks in Britain.

Who is being more rational, the US/UK governments or the terrorists?

I don’t think the world…and bad guys…are that simple.
Besides, I don’t think it’s “British citizens” who you have to worry about.

Unfortunately it is British citizens that we have to worry about.

Three of the London bombers were born in Britain, and one in Jamaica and none of them had significant criminal records before the attacks. They all grew-up in this country (although one was only 19 years old and another 18 years old) and were educated here.

According to the bombers themselves the attacks were a response to the perceived persecution of Muslims by British forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And what about the recent convictions of the ‘2006 transatlantic aircraft plot’ in London? Certainly two of the bombers (probably all four) were born in Britain and the leader of the plot stated in his suicide video that the terrorist attacks were an attempt to ‘to tackle what he believed was the root cause, Western foreign policy.’

What about the Glasgow Airport attack or the car-bombs attempted by the same group. One of the attackers was a British born doctor (of Iraqi extraction) the other was Indian born.

I for one do not underestimate the intelligence of any of these suicide bombers; the fact that the leaders of the groups are Doctors, PhD students, degree qualified engineers would support the theory that they are of above average intelligence.

…but I’ll remind the viewers that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11…

Exactly, but politicians, particularly US politicians continually mentioned 9/11 and Iraq in the same sentences until it lodged in the public consciousness so if you asked the average US (or UK) citizen what the invasion of Iraq was about, most would say simply ‘9/11’!

This isn’t meant to be anti-American but there seems to be an assumption in the West and in the UK in particular that all the terrorists and extremists, or any of the population of Iraq or Afghanistan for that matter are stupid.

Just because somebody doesn’t wear fashionable clothes, have an iPhone or a HD TV doesn’t mean they are a retard. In fact quite the opposite.

Western democracy tried very hard to convince us (well actually they didn’t have to try that hard) that the invasion of Iraq was to remove the threat of WMD or ‘something to do with 9/11’ and that the invasion of Afghanistan was ‘something to do with terrorism, the Taliban, drugs or 9/11’ but seems not to have noticed that the real terror threat to the UK comes from our own citizens who are trying to ‘avenge’ UK/US foreign policy.

I’m not a fan of either of the wars..but I’ll remind the viewers that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, (remember the whole WMD debate?)

A very good point, and one that seems to be lost on a lot of people.

All you would achieve is totally alienating everybody in Afghanistan and giving more reason for British citizens to carry out suicide attacks in Britain.

You’re assuming the people whi carry out terror attacks think rationally.
That’s rather like thinking…”If we don’t anger Mr. Hitler, maybe he’ll leave us alone.”
I don’t think the world…and bad guys…are that simple.
Besides, I don’t think it’s “British citizens” who you have to worry about.

In the case of 9/11 attackers, none were US citizens, what about the London transport attacks?

I’m not a fan of either of the wars..but I’ll remind the viewers that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, (remember the whole WMD debate?)

A bomb-truck with a shedful of LGB’s is a far better method than walking sand.

A far better way of doing what exactly…..killing people, any people?

That’s pretty close to ‘kill them all and let god sort them out!’ and probably pretty close to what the planners of 9/11 were thinking.

How exactly are you going to make sure that you are only dropping bombs on the enemy combatants? Yes, a LGB is very accurate but I seem to remember that the US dropped a LGB on a wedding in Afghanistan a year or so ago.

All you would achieve is totally alienating everybody in Afghanistan and giving more reason for British citizens to carry out suicide attacks in Britain.

But perhaps there might be a way of doing this without putting so many people in harms way. If you want to put it into those terms, terrorists have had major successes for little cost – 9/11, Madrid, London etc. Conversely, British and American forces have had less success at far greater cost.

Well I think you have to look at the reasons why ‘terrorism’ exists. Terrorism targets the most venerable parts of the huge infrastructure of a state and achieves maximum physical damage, and more importantly, physiological impact (amplified by the very efficient modern media) with a few motivated individuals and a tiny amount of improvised equipment.

To defeat terrorism you either have to protect everything, which is clearly impossible, or you have to locate and arrest a few terrorists, who up until that point are probably potential terrorists (without even a criminal record), who are hiding in a (possibly sympathetic) population of millions. Not so easy.

Surely the onus is on our respective Governments to find a way of eliminating terrorists without having to put so many troops on the ground.

Well so far they seem to be looking in the wrong place…

…the terrorists who attacked London were from Leeds and the 9/11 terrorists were from Saudi Arabia although they were resident in the US at the time.

Isn’t that what the Taliban believe they are doing? You’ve just stated that you think the Taliban’s protection of itself is 100% normal and acceptable. So, if that’s the case does it come down to who is morally right or who wields the biggest stick?

I do not advocate terrorism or support the terrorists. It is something that needs to be stopped. But I don’t think making US and UK service personnel walk in front of IED’s is the way to do it.

Regards,

kev35

Aye, and we are morally right. The ordinary “People” in those countries are equally morally right. It’s the scum that is wrong.
Aye, we should have done more from the air. A bomb-truck with a shedful of LGB’s is a far better method than walking sand.