Valhalla Legends Archive

I like how people will whip out the WTC thing as a reason to do anything, saying how it's such a huge world-altering event that never happened to anyone else, when in fact there are terrorist attacks happening in other countries every day.

Quote from: Soul Taker on March 08, 2004, 05:57 AM
I like how people will whip out the WTC thing as a reason to do anything, saying how it's such a huge world-altering event that never happened to anyone else, when in fact there are terrorist attacks happening in other countries every day.

Not sure why you like that.  But it was a world altering event in that it marked the first time that a foreign terrorist operation had a success in the United States.  It put many wheels in motion that were otherwise dormant.  The US dedicated its technology, intelligence, and military resources to go on a global hunt for terrorists, and damn anyone who gets in the way.

This is similar to WWII, when the USA watched Europe at war, until the Japanese conducted their sneak attack on Pearl Harbor.  That pissed off Americans enough to care, and since we don't do anything halfway, we put the entire country behind the effort to help Europe win.

Why'd they do that, anyway?  It's not like they thought the US would take it without retaliating, and I'm sure they'd know that the US would be able to beat them.

My theories are:
A) The attack was orchistrated by the President, or at least somebody in power in the US, to force them to go into a war the people were unsure about.
B) It was supposed to be a sneak attack on Canada, but they got lost on the way.

I'm personally leaning towards B.

Retaliate against who Iraq? Thats the only people they really went after. I don't think Sudam blew tp the WTC, did he?
And I don't think it was the first terrorist operation to succed, probably just the first one we've heard about.
A little bit after it happened one of the first thoughts that came to my mind was that Bush did it to get the Patriot Acts passed. I'm figuring there's a clause in there somewhere that says in case of severe emergencies involving tarrer the president becomes supreme choice maker (dictator). But, it's probably just a crazy conspiracy theory.
It's funny how bus etiquette turned into this.

Quote from: Soul Taker on March 08, 2004, 05:57 AM
I like how people will whip out the WTC thing as a reason to do anything, saying how it's such a huge world-altering event that never happened to anyone else, when in fact there are terrorist attacks happening in other countries every day.

Its something that the US never had to deal with. With a power structure as wide spread as the United States' its bound to have reverberations throughout the world.

Quote from: iago on March 08, 2004, 09:31 AM
My theories are:
A) The attack was orchistrated by the President, or at least somebody in power in the US, to force them to go into a war the people were unsure about.
B) It was supposed to be a sneak attack on Canada, but they got lost on the way.

I'm personally leaning towards B.

A- You're a fucking idiot. End of story.
B- Who would waste their time with Canada?

Quote from: Adron on March 07, 2004, 09:08 PM

Quote from: Hazard on March 07, 2004, 08:16 PM

Quote from: iago on March 07, 2004, 07:50 PM
Who lets americans, who have attitudes like this, carry guns, anyway?  It's no wonder they have 100x the murder rate of any other country.

It wouldn't be smart to go to Israel and tell them they deserve it for their actions with Palestine either.

No, that wouldn't be smart. Arguing with terrorists can be dangerous to your health. Terrorists might well ship you back to your home country in a box. Luckily iago lives in a civilized country, where he can safely express his views.

You are more than welcome to come here and express your views. But when you walk onto somebody elses turf and bash what they believe, you are inviting trouble.

Quote from: crashtestdummy on March 08, 2004, 03:55 PM
Retaliate against who Iraq? Thats the only people they really went after. I don't think Sudam blew tp the WTC, did he?

What makes you think you know all the facts?

Quote from: crashtestdummy on March 08, 2004, 03:55 PM
I'm figuring there's a clause in there somewhere that says in case of severe emergencies involving tarrer the president becomes supreme choice maker (dictator).

Wrong. Read it before you talk.

Quote from: crashtestdummy on March 08, 2004, 03:55 PM
But, it's probably just a crazy conspiracy theory.

Your only accurate statment of the post.

Quote from: crashtestdummy on March 08, 2004, 03:55 PM
Retaliate against who Iraq? Thats the only people they really went after. I don't think Sudam blew tp the WTC, did he?
And I don't think it was the first terrorist operation to succed, probably just the first one we've heard about.
A little bit after it happened one of the first thoughts that came to my mind was that Bush did it to get the Patriot Acts passed. I'm figuring there's a clause in there somewhere that says in case of severe emergencies involving tarrer the president becomes supreme choice maker (dictator). But, it's probably just a crazy conspiracy theory.
It's funny how bus etiquette turned into this.

Doh?  We bombed the fuck out of Afghanistan and replaced the government there in short order.  Women now have the right to participate equally in government and generally everyone is treated better.  How can you say Iraq is the only one we went after?

As I said, this was the first foreign terrorist act that succeeded within the United States.  I didn't say it was the first to succeed anywhere.  One only has to remember Beirut in 1979(?) under the Carter peacenik era.  Terrorists blew up the U.S. Marine barracks there with the largest conventional explosion in the history of the world, by driving trucks through the front gate.  The American policy was to have Marines at the gate with no ammunition in their guns.

Quote from: Grok on March 08, 2004, 05:33 PM
Women now have the right to participate equally in government and generally everyone is treated better.  

Is this confirmed? I read some article that claimed maybe things weren't really changing, the country was just getting some new masters.

Quote from: Hazard on March 08, 2004, 04:31 PM

Quote from: iago on March 08, 2004, 09:31 AM
My theories are:
A) The attack was orchistrated by the President, or at least somebody in power in the US, to force them to go into a war the people were unsure about.
B) It was supposed to be a sneak attack on Canada, but they got lost on the way.

I'm personally leaning towards B.

A- You're a fucking idiot. End of story.
B- Who would waste their time with Canada?

I see you've also lost your sense of humour?

Quote from: Hazard on March 08, 2004, 04:31 PM

Quote from: Adron on March 07, 2004, 09:08 PM

Quote from: Hazard on March 07, 2004, 08:16 PM

Quote from: iago on March 07, 2004, 07:50 PM
Who lets americans, who have attitudes like this, carry guns, anyway?  It's no wonder they have 100x the murder rate of any other country.

It wouldn't be smart to go to Israel and tell them they deserve it for their actions with Palestine either.

No, that wouldn't be smart. Arguing with terrorists can be dangerous to your health. Terrorists might well ship you back to your home country in a box. Luckily iago lives in a civilized country, where he can safely express his views.

You are more than welcome to come here and express your views. But when you walk onto somebody elses turf and bash what they believe, you are inviting trouble.

Speaking of "somebody elses turf", you are sitting on vL's forums insulting their members and using your stupidly blind arguments to prove nothing.  You're walking onto our turf and bashing what we believe, so are we supposed to retaliate against you?

"Bus Etiquette."

'nough said.

Quote from: iago on March 08, 2004, 05:44 PM
Speaking of "somebody elses turf", you are sitting on vL's forums insulting their members and using your stupidly blind arguments to prove nothing.  You're walking onto our turf and bashing what we believe, so are we supposed to retaliate against you?

They are arguments that your personal biases do not accept. I never said you shouldn't retaliate either.

to hazard: What makes you think you know all of the facts?
I said I'm figuring, that meant I'm guessing without reading it. YOur being an ass over a simple discussion. And it wasn't even a serious post if you couldn't figure that out from the last staement.
to Grok: I really don't think blowing up afghanistan really helped retaliate against a certain group that new america would be looking for them there.
The reason why AMerica is hated so much by other countries is because they can't mind their business.

Quote from: crashtestdummy on March 09, 2004, 01:11 AM
The reason why AMerica is hated so much by other countries is because they can't mind their business.

It's not really that. It's that they think they're always right. That they don't participate on equal/proportional terms. They decide that something is "wrong", and then they go "fix" that. They may consult others, but those consultations are merely a formality. They don't listen to others. At the same time, they themselves are doing and supporting things considered "wrong" by the others. They care only about themselves and their own interests. They are greedy and selfish. They share the soul of Microsoft. They are evil incarnate.


Think I covered a good share of the reasons?

Quote from: Adron on March 08, 2004, 05:37 PM

Quote from: Grok on March 08, 2004, 05:33 PM
Women now have the right to participate equally in government and generally everyone is treated better.  

Is this confirmed? I read some article that claimed maybe things weren't really changing, the country was just getting some new masters.

Not confirmed.  I have only the media to rely on, as this is not important enough for me to travel to Afghanistan for independent evaluation.  Wonder what Amnesty International says.

Quote from: crashtestdummy on March 09, 2004, 01:11 AMto Grok: I really don't think blowing up afghanistan really helped retaliate against a certain group that new america would be looking for them there.

Sorry, I read this twice and must request you restate with better utilization of grammar.  I can derive a hint of what you might have meant, but it is better that you yourself state what you mean.

Quote from: Adron on March 09, 2004, 04:42 AM
It's not really that. It's that they think they're always right. That they don't participate on equal/proportional terms. They decide that something is "wrong", and then they go "fix" that. They may consult others, but those consultations are merely a formality. They don't listen to others. At the same time, they themselves are doing and supporting things considered "wrong" by the others. They care only about themselves and their own interests. They are greedy and selfish. They share the soul of Microsoft. They are evil incarnate.

Think I covered a good share of the reasons?

I agree.  I think snubbing the UN was one of the dumbest things the US has ever done with respect to international politics.