Another 9-11? What is America's reaction? - Post-9/11 Era

Another 9-11? What is America's reaction?

Post-9/11 Era Forum

Pages:  1Original Forum    Popular Forums    Search

Posted by: DaveDom

No doubt this war in Iraq is very good for Bin Laden and Al Quida. And according to Blair it's not a matter of if there will be another terrorist attacks, it's just a matter of when.

If Blair's warnings are correct, what will America do after the next 9-11 attack? Have they left themselve with only one option and that is to escalate the war in the Middle East?

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

We will do just as we did on 9/11/2001. We will band together and become stronger, an American flag will once again be seen on every doorstep and hung from every vehicle, we will rebuild, mourn those lost, and then roll up our sleeves and come looking for those who would attack us.

To not act because of a threat of terror is to conceed defeat to the terrorists.

Some of us still stand united...

Reply To this Message

Posted by: DaveDom

That doesn't really answer my question.

Seeing as the type of terrrorist attack will probably be suicidal there won't be anyone to look for. So as I asked before will you escalate the war in the Middle East? And please don't say "we will do whatever is necessary." I just want to know if you agree that America should now attack Syria or Iran or Korea? Do you see any possible dangers in this policy?

The Observer today has quotes from many in the right-wing US administration that states openly that they would like to go into Syria. Will you support them? And will you support the re-construction of vast parts of the world you don't like in America's image.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

As to Iran and Syria, it depends. If Syria attempts to hide the top members of the Iraqi regime...then maybe. If Iran continues to try to obtian nuclear weapons, then probably.

As to North Korea yes we should go in...this is probably the most pressing of the three. The North Korean government has made their intentions clear that they are going to make nuclear weapons, Afganistan might have been just the tip of the iceberg in the war on terror. First Afganistan, then Iraq, then North Korea, then the world gets the idea...or maybe we would have to go after someone else...but eventually they will understand that we will not be terrorized...that if they threaten us they had better be willing to play with the big boys.

Also, suicide bombers normally do not act alone. 19 people hijacked planes on 9/11, however, an entire organization aided/funded/trained them...there will be people who can be held accountable.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: nowar

if another 911 occurs ..... I think the one which will get it will have the support of everybody BUT if it's U.S. of A. you will have something else more then the support: "WE TOLD YOU ....."

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

If another 9/11 happens you can dance in the streets all you want and sing "we told you so." (however I would hope that you would be beaten senseless by your local community). Frankly, I believe that there probably will be another 9/11 (at lest one more), but this will happen ten fold if we do nothing.

By systemattically attacking the organizations and nations which support these kind of attacks it makes them increasingly less likely (on a large 9/11 scale).

Reply To this Message

Posted by: nowar

@Retsep

you realy think that the war against Iraq was to stop Terrorism ????




And I said: people will support U.S. of A. if it occurs there .... but you will hear "we told you so" and I'm not quite sure that these people will be beaten by anyone except ..... U.S. .....

Reply To this Message

Posted by: wonkyconcrete

It dont think it is 'IF' i am sure it is 'WHEN'. Take note of the anti-american sentiment from all quarters, including america! A country that is now disliked more by Islamic fundamentalists as well as 'run of the mill' anti-americans than ever in its history.

The terrorists may now include iraqis (they didnt do much before this, but I think some may be a bit more pro-active now) but other than that the threat is still from the same people so who knows who the US will decide to make an example of next time.

Personally, I think 'the terrorists' will go for even easier targets, bombs in disneyland, train de-railments, carbombs, poisoning water supplies and anything that involves weapons that can be obtained or manufactured in the US like ricin gas.

Soon or maybe already, the generation of terrorists will be american, born and bred, so with no outside countries to retaliate against I think attention will focus on homeland security and the accompanying loss of freedom. And then.........you get white american terrorists fighting against the freedom taking government........violence really does perpetuate violence.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

First of all, I don't see anything humorous about the war in Iraq (or the war on terrorism). Let me say that again because it's very important...there is nothing humorous about this war.

Yes, this was about terrorism. There are plently of countries with horrible dictators...there is only one that has proven the willingness to use WMD against its own people (and others), that same tyrant openly supports terrorism. Freeing the Iraqi people from Saddam is great...but a great analogy for this war is the American Civil War.

The Civil War wasn't about slavery...it was about state's rights...slavery being abolished was just a good outcome of the war. Just like the war is about fighting terrorism...getting rid of Saddam is a good outcome.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: DaveDom

quote:
Originally posted by Retsep
First Afganistan, then Iraq, then North Korea, then the world gets the idea...or maybe we would have to go after someone else...but eventually they will understand that we will not be terrorized...that if they threaten us they had better be willing to play with the big boys.


"...we will not be terrorized..." You are already the most terror stricken and paranoid nation on earth. Do you honestly think that waging war all over the world is going to make you safer? I don't understand this logic. In the UK we tried to defeat US funded IRA terrorism for 30 years and after thousands of people had dies we ended up talking to them.

quote:
Also, suicide bombers normally do not act alone. 19 people hijacked planes on 9/11, however, an entire organization aided/funded/trained them...there will be people who can be held accountable.


For decades it has been common for terrorists to work in cells that have no contact with other cells or contact with political groups. They lie dorment for years before they attack.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

"The terrorists may now include iraqis (they didnt do much before this, but I think some may be a bit more pro-active now)"

Really? Actually the main planner of the first WTC bombing (1993) was Iraqi (and is related to the high ranking al-Qaeda person they they recently arrested in Pakistan...about a month or so ago). Not that one person characterizes an entire country, however, I thought that I would just point this out so that you will hopefully cease to make baseless claims.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: DaveDom

quote:
Originally posted by Retsep
...there is only one that has proven the willingness to use WMD against its own people


America was still trying to do business with Sadam 11 months after they killed 5000 Kurds. Stop kidding yourself that America is the good guy and everyone else is bad.

"Eleven months after this attrocity (the gasing of he Kurds), the assistant of state James Kelly few to Baghdad to tell Saddam HusseinL " Your are a source for moderation in the region, and the United States wants to broaden her relationship with Iraq""

Murdoch big supporter of this war defended the gasing by suggesting that "Iraq's use of chemical and nerve agents was purely defensive"
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

Your first statement regarding the US as "paranoid" is a bit strange. Are we really paranoid or are they really out to get us? I don't mean that to be silly. 9/11 was directed at America, so was the embassy bombings in 1998, the WTC was bombed in 1993, our brracks in saudi Arabia was attacked, we constantly hear reports of new terrorist being captured and terrorist plots being foiled...it would appear that we have reason to worry.

Also, the cells generally do not operate completely indepentently. there is generally someone above them who "activates them" this is the person who we would be after. Also, someone supports them, someone will train them...these people can also be held accountable.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

The US is not infallible. However are you saying that Saddam was justified?

Also, what you fail to mention is that within 3 years from the gas attack America had attacked Iraq (Desert Storm) and obviously no longer considered it an ally.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: trustno1atall

quote:
Originally posted by DaveDom
No doubt this war in Iraq is very good for Bin Laden and Al Quida. And according to Blair it's not a matter of if there will be another terrorist attacks, it's just a matter of when.

If Blair's warnings are correct, what will America do after the next 9-11 attack? Have they left themselve with only one option and that is to escalate the war in the Middle East?


REGARDLESS of what happens, fanatics like Bin Laden and blind followers who believe they're going to be in paradise after they die, will always wage jihad. It's all in the religion. I would rather live with the fear of non-nuclear terrorist attacks than a nuclear terrorist attack (if in this case Iraq was gone unchecked and allowed to make nuclear weapons). What if, what if? I believe the Bush Administration did a calculation and determined this, and in the long run, would result in less causalties if they took action sooner. If France and Europe weren't such cowards, it would have saved 50 million+ lives (most of which were civilians) that were lost during WWII and saved Britian, America, Canadians and the rest of the allies time and lives used to save the world.

For those people who say America did it for the oil need to get their head out from where it's stuck and realize there's more to life than just oil. Why make enemies out of the whole world just for oil? It's easier to invest in other forms of energy.

What I would like to see after the Iraq war is for the U.S. to push for peace in the Middle East with the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. This has gone on long enough. I would also like to see more "nation builders" in Afgahnistan to help rebuild that country.

The last thing I want is another war.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Retsep

I would agree with this except when you say that it is "in their religion."

Islam is just a perverted by bin Laden as Christianity is by Jerry Falwell (the guy who claimed "Tinky Winky" the Telebubby was in fact gay). These people are both fanatics (perhaps bin Laden is a bit more extreme), but still they do not represent thier respective organizations.

Islam does not inform people to attack civilians in mass like was done on 9/11. The problem is with the extremist groups, not the religion itself.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Rage

quote:
Originally posted by trustno1atall


REGARDLESS of what happens, fanatics like Bin Laden and blind followers who believe they're going to be in paradise after they die, will always wage jihad. It's all in the religion.


And who exactly told you it's in "their" religion? how much do you know about "their" religion anyway?

P.S. Before you answer my questions, i should mention that i am a muslim who knows "his" religion fairly well.

-Rage
Reply To this Message

Posted by: DaveDom

quote:
Originally posted by Retsep
The US is not infallible. However are you saying that Saddam was justified?

Also, what you fail to mention is that within 3 years from the gas attack America had attacked Iraq (Desert Storm) and obviously no longer considered it an ally.


I'm not saying what Saddam did was justified, Rupert Murdoch and your Government was.

trustno1atall:
REGARDLESS of what happens, fanatics like Bin Laden and blind followers who believe they're going to be in paradise after they die, will always wage jihad
This is pure right-wing propaganda - good and evil stuff - they are evil is what politicians say all the time. You might have to talk to all kinds of "evil" people before this ends. And America is just as capable as anyone else of carrying out attrocaties. What we don't need right now is Bush pumped up with power thinking he can take the whole world on. Where the hell are all the American moderates. You're leading the world down a very dangerous road.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: nowar

Retsep,

About U.S. gov and Iraq .... when U.S. gov doesn't need any more someone or doesn't want someone, what are they doing ?
There is a name for that: Foreign Policy.

Check that one: http://www.markfiore.com/animation/whoops.html

Now they try to give a message to the world: We have changed ...

Sorry I don't trust them ......

I think that a war is not the solution to that problem.
Ok, now you have Iraq, which country will be the next ?

Remember that terrorists do not live in one country, they are spread over the world ..... how many military war will be needed to stop the terrorists ?

Maybe you should ask yourself: what are the root cause of that hatred and fight that one, and it will not be with smart bomb, for sure .....

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Rage

quote:
Originally posted by Retsep
I would agree with this except when you say that it is "in their religion."

Islam is just a perverted by bin Laden as Christianity is by Jerry Falwell (the guy who claimed "Tinky Winky" the Telebubby was in fact gay). These people are both fanatics (perhaps bin Laden is a bit more extreme), but still they do not represent thier respective organizations.

Islam does not inform people to attack civilians in mass like was done on 9/11. The problem is with the extremist groups, not the religion itself.


Thanks for clarification Retsep. I like people who do a bit of research before talking.

-Rage
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Horbett

I want to draw the public's attention to the fact that it is cheap and easy to commit a terrorst act:

9-11 was a terrorist act commited by a small group of people on rather small money. In fact terrorists wouldn't need a sovereign state's help to commit a terrorist act.

The level of threat of terrorism in America depends on number of native muslims living in America. If there are many of them then wait for terrorist acts, may be smaller, then hitting the twin towers.

Look at Israel: terrorist acts are part of their life. But they neighbour Arabs and have Arabs on their territory.

Overthrowing a regime is not the best policy to fight terrorism in the US. Because an Iraqi/Korean/Iranian student may commit a terrorist act which will gain a publicity comparable to Iraqi war.

If there was an Iraqi in the US sad for the military defeat, wanted to explode a bomb on Broadway would there be enough security measures currently in N.Y. to prevent him?

What would be publicity effect of a kill of 20 people in a bomb's blast?

Components for a bomb can be easily bought in a hosehold shop and a recipe found in the Internet.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Charles

quote:
Originally posted by DaveDom
No doubt this war in Iraq is very good for Bin Laden and Al Quida. And according to Blair it's not a matter of if there will be another terrorist attacks, it's just a matter of when.

If Blair's warnings are correct, what will America do after the next 9-11 attack? Have they left themselve with only one option and that is to escalate the war in the Middle East?


I'm sure there are multiple plots to attack and kill Americans. They plotted and executed attacks prior to the liberation of Iraq, no doubt they will continue to do so.

If it looks like any nation state supported the attacks - it simply means that they declared war on the USA and the USA will defend itself. I don't think this is even a question. The countries that do harbor and support terrorists will hopefully think twice. Terrorist groups need support, money, and shelter from someone. That "someone" now knows what to expect after their proteges attack the US, so they will be more careful. The costs now outweigh the benefits.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: wonkyconcrete

Most terrorists that will attack the US are already living in the US, in fact many are probebly americans. It would be so hard to import WMD with security measures in place so most weapons will also be made there also.

It will be increasingly difficult to push the blame onto nation states, as in the case of iraq who had little to do with 911 but the government still need to push that blame and act so as not to appear helpless. Bush has succeeded in as much as he has fulfilled his agenda and he needed to be seen as protecting the US to do that.

Expect more attacks and fewer nations to blame. America is about to be forced to look within itself and face the threat that is growing within its own boundries.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Charles

quote:
Originally posted by wonkyconcrete
Most terrorists that will attack the US are already living in the US, in fact many are probebly americans. It would be so hard to import WMD with security measures in place so most weapons will also be made there also.


Maybe. I think the US is working hard on boosting security. The INS/visa issue with previous 9/11 guys was pretty bad...

quote:
It will be increasingly difficult to push the blame onto nation states, as in the case of iraq who had little to do with 911 but the government still need to push that blame and act so as not to appear helpless. Bush has succeeded in as much as he has fulfilled his agenda and he needed to be seen as protecting the US to do that.


I think most countries that are still condemned by the UNSC as supporting terrorism (Iraq is one of them) will do well to distance themselves from direct links. Iran used to have terrorist support as a line item in their budget!

quote:
Expect more attacks and fewer nations to blame. America is about to be forced to look within itself and face the threat that is growing within its own boundries.


I'm pretty sure we are looking hard. Many liberals would say too hard. It will become clearer and clearer on whose side different countries fall on if terrorism continues to escalate. I think the administration is pretty serious about terrorism, but there is no way to stop a fanatic with a block of C4 every single time. The people who want to kill Americans (or others) because we live in a tolerant society will never change their minds. Its just a fact of life. There are the Ghandi's and Martin Luther King's of the world, and there are the Bin Laden's. Different strokes for different folks.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: robert135

I have no doubt what so ever about couple things. If the 9-11 is in another country the Us will find them and kill them. If the 9-11 happens in the US? Another couple countries will fall, and I don't believe we would stop from even taking saudia arabia if it happened a second time.

Then I would personally put a sign on the holiest mosque in mecca saying "Treat others as you would have others treat you".

Reply To this Message

Posted by: DaveDom

As far as events are unfolding the US seems to be preparing everyone for the invasion of Syria so my original question is probably irrelevant.

So far: Syria supplied Iraq with night goggles and "fighters who want to kill americans", the WMD have been moved there, Sadam caught the bus to Syria to meat his wife, Sadam's Ba'th party are there, Hisbola are based there! they support terrrorism, it's Hamas' favourite holiday resourt, they are a dictatorship....

I admit I am very scared of America. Syria should be very scared of America but will they get down on there knees?

Reply To this Message

Posted by: robert135

Dave come on! Noone is asking them to get on their knees. They are asking them NOT to take in miltary and sadistic leaders of the Iraqi Regime (they had their change BEFORE the war). They are also asking them not to allow suicide bombers across the boarder into Iraq after egging them on (WHICH IS AN ACT OF WAR). They also ASKED them to stop selling weapons to Iraq in the middle of a war. After asking politely, then they flat out warned them, warned then again, then flat ouyt told them to stop doing it.

Either they are stupid, are hard of hearing, or are declaring war on the US.

Which do you think it is?

Reply To this Message

Posted by: photek

quote:
Originally posted by nowar
if another 911 occurs ..... I think the one which will get it will have the support of everybody BUT if it's U.S. of A. you will have something else more then the support: "WE TOLD YOU ....."


what are you talking about?

it's as if you're saying 'if only america hadn't gone to war in iraq, then they would have automatically gauranteed stoppage to any potential terrorist attacks to the u.s'

now we reach a difference of opinion. you think that this conflict will give rise to even more terrorist attacks. i agree that this is very possible in the immediate frame of time, but as more and more arabs realize saddam's bullcrap is reflected in their own leaders, and as iraq grows and continues to thank the coalition, anti-american sentiments will begin to be reversed, and terrorism will greatly be reduced.

have either of you ever thought about the connection between the concept of time, and terrorism? if so, i think you should take some time and explore the following question:

where would hussein's regime be in 10 years w/o this conflict? what about 20? 30?

seriously, do you guys have the capacity to think about anything except the casualties of war? anything at all? i know they support your argument, but you are starting to sound like saeed al-sahaf.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: mtliveingtree

retsep your right on the number there, 5 star, finally someone who really understands and is also ready to back it up,keep slapping them down eventually they will either stop or die, but thats what they plan on doing anyway hopefully they will die before hundreds do again, people seem to forget the cost of freedom and what it costs to keep it.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: DaveDom

quote:
Originally posted by robert135
Dave come on! Noone is asking them to get on their knees. They are asking them NOT to take in miltary and sadistic leaders of the Iraqi Regime (they had their change BEFORE the war). They are also asking them not to allow suicide bombers across the boarder into Iraq after egging them on (WHICH IS AN ACT OF WAR). They also ASKED them to stop selling weapons to Iraq in the middle of a war. After asking politely, then they flat out warned them, warned then again, then flat ouyt told them to stop doing it.

Either they are stupid, are hard of hearing, or are declaring war on the US.

Which do you think it is?


Syria like all countries does not want to lose face. Call it stupid or hard of hearing they are a nation that is facing a huge superpower that will bomb without legal juristication and against world public opinion.

Saying co-operate just means do as your told, capitulate, show respect, whatever but do not cross us or we'll crush you. It's a threat. If anyone EVER talked to America like that what do you think would be Americas reaction? And probably Syria's great fear is that whether they co-operate or not, the US may have already decided to go in. Plenty of people in the Bush administration think this is a great idea.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: USA1

Syria is walking a thin line in the eyes of the world. They could use a little house cleaning I suspect.

From what I hear, all terrorism among Arabs is directly related to the elimination of Israel.

So, terrorism would end if Israel didn't exist?

What a crock.

As for American citizens becomeing terrorists? We already have them. Timothy McVae is a prime example. There are other Militia groups withing the US that are against the very government that allows them to by weopons and protest. They are known and are being watched very closely.

I don't fear terrorists. I hate terrorists. This gives me an advantage, because I will not cower in fear as they wish.
I will go about my daily life with my eyes open.

Reply To this Message

Posted by: Enigma

quote:
Originally posted by robert135
Dave come on! Noone is asking them to get on their knees. They are asking them NOT to take in miltary and sadistic leaders of the Iraqi Regime (they had their change BEFORE the war). They are also asking them not to allow suicide bombers across the boarder into Iraq after egging them on (WHICH IS AN ACT OF WAR). They also ASKED them to stop selling weapons to Iraq in the middle of a war. After asking politely, then they flat out warned them, warned then again, then flat ouyt told them to stop doing it.

Either they are stupid, are hard of hearing, or are declaring war on the US.

Which do you think it is?

First of all, none of those actions, or inactions are a direct violation af any kind of agreements. They don't have to listen to a god**** thing the US says if they don't want to. People are definately trumping up the situation with Syria.

I just want to say this here and now. The US going into Iraq will benefit the Iraqi people in the long term, but going into Syria will benefit noone, and will be undeniably 100% illegal. My support of the US ends at the Iraqi border. Any futher than that and I'll be disappointed to say the least. Not surprised, but disappointed. At this point in time however, I think any such action on the part of the US is extremely unlikely.
Reply To this Message

Posted by: Charles

quote:
Originally posted by DaveDom

Saying co-operate just means do as your told, capitulate, show respect, whatever but do not cross us or we'll crush you. It's a threat. If anyone EVER talked to America like that what do you think would be Americas reaction? And probably Syria's great fear is that whether they co-operate or not, the US may have already decided to go in. Plenty of people in the Bush administration think this is a great idea.


Try to make a value judgement here.

What is the US asking for? Hasn't Bush telegraphed his moves way in advance?

If Syria is harboring and supporting terrorists, then they had better cooperate. The US will probably be patient for a bit. If they are protecting Saddam's henchment, they ought to give them up, etc.

I don't think the US is expecting anything out of the ordinary here.

Personally I think it will all be settled diplomatically, Iraq will flourish, the PAlestinians will have a state, and the arab dictatorships will crumble one by one.

The only thing that will make this fail is direct provocations by muslim fanatics who do NOT want peace!
Reply To this Message

Posted by: DaveDom

Some people just refuse to be pushed around. I think Americans can understand this attitude.

This present adminstration just cannot seem to be bothered using diplomacy - it sometimes works better than bullying.

One other thing, I do sometimes get the impression that Americans feel they have a monopoly on suffering. The US is not the only country in the world that has suffered and it certainly hasn't suffered anywher near as much as some nations.

Reply To this Message

Pages:  1 Free Forums    Chat Forum

Post-9/11 Era Forum: Another 9-11? What is America's reaction?

Forum Forum Forum