Terrorism is not a threat to our survival.

[Nuc]

Interesting concept. What do you think the reaction of the United States should have been after 9/11?

I think as a result of the endless hand wringing and that we were practically celebrating the event a lot of people went into bunker mentality and that hurt our economy.

I lived in NYC at the time and suddenly you could get into any restaurant that previously required reservations. People were so scared by the event that they shut down and started to hoard their money.

I think this had something to do with the media turning 9/11 into entertainment. And the politicians craving the spotlight didn't help either.

Not to trivialize 9/11 but not a lot of property was destroyed and human cost was not massive. The aftermath hurt the US much more than 9/11 itself. And our oversentimentalizing it gave the enemy a lot more to gloat about than if we had taken it in a more matter of fact way.

Just my opinion as someone who saw it happen with my own eyes and lived in the eye of the storm afterwards.

 

[CSM]

I think as a result of the endless hand wringing and that we were practically celebrating the event a lot of people went into bunker mentality and that hurt our economy.

I lived in NYC at the time and suddenly you could get into any restaurant that previously required reservations. People were so scared by the event that they shut down and started to hoard their money.

I think this had something to do with the media turning 9/11 into entertainment. And the politicians craving the spotlight didn't help either.

Not to trivialize 9/11 but not a lot of property was destroyed and human cost was not massive. The aftermath hurt the US much more than 9/11 itself. And our oversentimentalizing it gave the enemy a lot more to gloat about than if we had taken it in a more matter of fact way.

Just my opinion as someone who saw it happen with my own eyes and lived in the eye of the storm afterwards.

"the human cost was not massive" Now, I realize that such a sentiment is all a matter of perspective but 3000 folks at one whack seems pretty massive to me. Of course, neither you nor I were one of the 3000.

The fact is that a terrorist act did indeed hurt the US in many ways. Kind of belies the argument that terrorism is not a threat to our survival.

 

[Nuc]

"the human cost was not massive" Now, I realize that such a sentiment is all a matter of perspective but 3000 folks at one whack seems pretty massive to me. Of course, neither you nor I were one of the 3000.

The fact is that a terrorist act did indeed hurt the US in many ways. Kind of belies the argument that terrorism is not a threat to our survival.

Not massive compared to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the tsunami for example. Not massive compared to cancer deaths or automobile accidents.

I said "not to trivialize". But we reacted as though 200,000 people died.

 

[GotZoom]

Not massive compared to Hiroshima and Nagasaki, or the tsunami for example. Not massive compared to cancer deaths or automobile accidents.

I said "not to trivialize". But we reacted as though 200,000 people died.

It might as well have been 200,000.

And saying "not to trivialize" doesn't keep you from soundling like you are saying that 3000 people dying in an attack "in our house" is no big deal.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Careful who you lump into that category.

The “service sector” constitutes 71 percent of all U.S. employment. It encompasses all workers not involved in agriculture, mining, manufacturing, and construction, i.e., the “goods producing” industries. It includes a range of activities such as legal services, motion pictures, automotive repair, and computer software. Under this broad definition, the service sector includes transportation, real estate, trade, communications, and finance industries, as well as its largest component called the “services industry.” The services industry itself makes up 36 percent of all employment–about half of all service sector jobs–and includes health care workers, computer programmers, and advertising agents. Whether one looks at the service sector or just the services industry, the number of jobs paying above the median wage exceeds those paying below the median wage, and is increasing at a more rapid rate.

In the overall service sector, higher-paying jobs now exceed lower-paying jobs, increasing from 47 percent of all service sector jobs in July 1993 to 51 percent in July 1999. This occurred because higher-paying jobs grew at a substantially faster rate than lower-paying jobs, 21 percent versus 5 percent. Similarly, in the narrower services industry category, the percentage of higher-paying jobs rose from 53 percent to 57 percent during this same period, with higher-paying jobs growing by 26 percent and lower-paying jobs by only 8 percent.

Within the services industry, the growth in higher wages is due to substantial increases in the executive, administrative, and managerial, professional specialty, and technicians and related support job categories, which saw growth rates between 19 and 34 percent. The broader service sector saw strong growth in these same job categories, as well as substantial growth in higher-paying other service occupations (33 percent). (See Figure.) Additionally, there was a tremendous increase in lower-paying technicians and related support jobs, around 50 percent. However, this is the only lower-paying job category that saw an increase of more than 10 percent in the broader service sector.

In general, lower-paying jobs experienced much more modest growth in the services industry than in the overall service sector. The sales occupation category is a notable exception. It increased by approximately 30 percent in the services industry, but only increased 10 percent in the broader service sector where there was also an increase in the higher-paying sales occupation job category. Additionally, both categories saw a significant decrease in lower-paying farming, forestry, and fishing occupations, 15 percent in the services industry and 18 percent in the service sector.

Clearly the notion that most service sector jobs pay poorly is wrong. It is also incorrect to believe that most new jobs fall into this category. More than half of all jobs in the service sector currently pay above the median wage and most new jobs pay above the median wage. Lower-paying “hamburger-flipping” jobs continue to grow, but executive and professional jobs paying higher wages are growing faster.

http://www.epf.org/pubs/newsletters/1999/et991014.asp

I started reading this thinking gotzoom wrote it, because the linke is at the end, and Iwas like,"damn, gotzoom is a genius". LOL. He may be, but I thought he was whipping out statistics like rain man.

 

[Nuc]

It might as well have been 200,000.

And saying "not to trivialize" doesn't keep you from soundling like you are saying that 3000 people dying in an attack "in our house" is no big deal.

It was a big deal of course. But by allowing it to destroy our economy we played into the hands of the terrorists and helped them with their endgame.

Are you saying that it was a good thing that we allowed 9/11 to slow down/destroy our economy? Was that recession a wonderful form of mourning for the victims? I don't see anything positive or appropriate about it.

 

[GotZoom]

It was a big deal of course. But by allowing it to destroy our economy we played into the hands of the terrorists and helped them with their endgame.

Are you saying that it was a good thing that we allowed 9/11 to slow down/destroy our economy? Was that recession a wonderful form of mourning for the victims? I don't see anything positive or appropriate about it.

Any time there is a major disaster of some sort, the economy will be hurt. Look at the effect Katrina is going to have. Everything causes a domino effect, it can't be helped.

 

[USViking]

Fear strategy is what they are using...thats why they call it TERRORISM. They want us to act a certain way after they attack, thats the point, or they wouldnt do it.
When you say the fear strategy is an empty concoction. Thats just, blind.

"The way" they want us to react is what?-
now that we have no forces left in the holy land
of Saudi Arabia, the next step they insist on
is the abandonment of Israel. After that, I suspect
they will insist we convert to Islam.

Eradication of their principal base in Afghanistan
is definitely NOT what they wanted us to do, nor
did they expect it. There were reports of a Bin Laden
wise crack to the effect that all we would do after
9/11 would be to file a lawsuit.

What is your own opinion of the Afghanistan war?

Wow, your greatest enemy. I wonder how many terrorists would be created if you kill 100 million terrorists. a Billion?

I did not suggest killing 100 million people. There is
no way of identifying most terrorist sympathisers
with our present level of intelligence sophistication.
If our techniques improve enough I certainly would
advocate killing anyone all those engaging in terrorist
activity, including those who do as little as to willingly
give terrorists a free meal, even if the numbers do
exceed 100 million.

You know how many would sympathize with terrorists if we were not in iraq/afghan/saudi arabia? alot.

We have no regular forces now in SA, only advisors
and liason personnel.

Afghanistan was the location of the highest concentration
of terrorists in the world at the time, and they had
admitted and boasted of planning 9/11, and what
was done had to be done. There is no doubt events
since the war there have shown most Afghanis themselves
support the action we took. We are just going to have to
deal with the dementia of any other Muslims who are
antagonized by what we have done there.

I do think it possible if not likely that the Iraq war
has added to the numbers of active terrorists. We
are embarked on a historic attempt at Democratization
there, and we must do our best to ride it out.

To the reich wing, seems occupying shithole cities in the desert is more important than supporting our troops.(their wellbeing)

The best way to support our troops is to give them
the tools they need to accoplish their mission, not
to make moronic, trolling comments about "reich wings".

Most people with delusions dont sleep much. "they commin to get me!!"

I have had several dreams in which I saw nuclear
clouds rising from a distance over our cities. This is
an understandible psychological response to the real
threat of real terrorists who would really detonate
nuclear WMDs within us if they could.

Yes, you're correct. But we are creating terrorists faster than we can kill them off.

Then we will have to increase the rate at which
we kill them. We have the ability to do so if
we use our incomprably vaster technical resources
to our best advantage.

So we do exactly what the terrorists want, fight them on their ground.
And we did what binladen promised his people and the masses.

Bin Laden and his masses were driven with great slaughter
from their primary base in Afghanistan, and are now
operating in the area only as tattered remnants.

Also, I would rather fight them there than here, and I
do not really think BL envisioned our taking such agressive
action. He may welcome it in Iraq, although things are
not going all that well for him there. He surely did not
welcome it in Afghanistan.

No, you're doing total reverse thinking. we can't fight wars without strong economy, if we do, we destroying ourselves.

Our economy has borne up sufficiently well to date,
and I expect it will in the futire.

 

[USViking]

Actually you are dead wrong..the reason mcveigh bombed the oklahoma building is because he believed that clinton would take away many of our rights, overreact in many ways. So that all the good christians would rise up and take this country back. Clinton didnt, and they didnt.

I am dead right, and you have not respnoded
at all to what I actually said.

actually yes we did. If you were told that terrorists were going to hijack airplanes and target US cities, what would they target in these cities? hello!

All we knew was that about three suspicious characters
were trying to learn how to fly airplanes.

The best guess at the time, a mistaken one, was that
terrorists might use aircraft to drop chemical or biological
contaminants.

 

[xen]

Do you mean the individuals that actually flew the planes or the organization that supported their efforts? For the most part, the members of the cell that flew the planes went down with their ship, so to speak. Al Quaeda as an organization was hiding out in various countries like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, etc. So which country would YOU have invaded to get the terrorist group?

I would possibly invade afghanistan, but i wouldnt try to secure the whole country. fail, and let the warlords rule it.

If i invaded Iraq, i wouldnt make peaceful protests, and labor unions illegal.
And create a constitution that makes it law that iraq must deal with certain corporations.

 

[CSM]

I would possibly invade afghanistan, but i wouldnt try to secure the whole country. fail, and let the warlords rule it.

If i invaded Iraq, i wouldnt make peaceful protests, and labor unions illegal.
And create a constitution that makes it law that iraq must deal with certain corporations.

Without securing the whole country, how would you possibly capture the terrorists? They would just move from one safe haven to the next. What would your guarantee against failure be? Who would you let rule the country?

I know this seems like a lot of questions, but it is going somewhere....

As tot he second part of your post, do you know anything about the Iraqi culture? If you have some in depth knowledge, please share. The whole "peaceful protest/labor union" thing was not insitgated by the US. As for the constitution being created there, the US is not writing it, the Iraqis are.

 

[xen]

Viking, I just dont feel its good idea to take in crowds of suspected terrorists.
With these warfronts like iraq, it creates this problem..

If we pulled back and looked at the big picture, most of them are not terrorists.

The real terrorist group is bin laden, his teacher, and the other top leaders. Thats it...all the warfront commanders, we created them, they are not suicide bombers. Most likely most of the people we are fighting in iraq, are iraqi factions. Same with Afghanistan.

So step back, and grab the real bad guys, they cant touch us after that! Nobody can, where are they going to attack us? here? no, we'll have so much extra money we would have awesome intel and border control.

I think this administration is liking the war situation..they like what it does for their politics. It IS in your ideology, the ends justify means.
You may not realize this now, but i can already tell it is effecting you.
It is not logical to go around smashing dictators...its too much trauma for the populous for one thing.

 

[xen]

Sorry guys, I leave for 20 minutes and cant answer dozens and dozens of questions.
Just ask me one question or something.

 

[GotZoom]

Sorry guys, I leave for 20 minutes and cant answer dozens and dozens of questions.
Just ask me one question or something.

You can't keep up...Rookie?

:

 

[xen]

I cannot keep up, seriously. This is not chat.

So, ya'll reich wingers like the whole feudalism idea? I bet you're warming up to it. Its very stable, you would like that..worked for centuries.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I cannot keep up, seriously. This is not chat.

So, ya'll reich wingers like the whole feudalism idea? I bet you're warming up to it. Its very stable, you would like that..worked for centuries.

Yeah. Feudalism. We're advocating feurdalism. Gosh, you're a knob.

 

[Abbey Normal]

Want a "good" job? Work hard in school, learn a trade, go to college, join the miltary. Etc. Anyone can do it if they really want to.

Want a "bad" job? Slack off in school, hang out, do drugs, get pregnant young. Leave yourself unqualified for any good paying jobs, then be sure blame everyone else (or Bush, of course) for all of your problems.

As for your "terrorism isn't worth worrying about" mantra, something tells me that if everything about our country was the same, but a Dem was in office (even a sexual predator Dem President with a large supply if cigars and interns) you would be singing a different tune.

 

[xen]

Who said advocate!? haha
Its just very close to the con way of thinking.

1. ends justify means.
2. the people of this country are a mob, dont trust them.
3. few rich, lots of poor.
4. One party


Sure dont care about noulleans. Limbaugh lied his ass off, saying bush was on the phone considering the military, because the locals were not acting fast enough.
You know that the whole state will be red because all the victems are gone to texas and elsewhere? nice timing!

 

[xen]

Want a "good" job? Work hard in school, learn a trade, go to college, join the miltary. Etc. Anyone can do it if they really want to.

Want a "bad" job? Slack off in school, hang out, do drugs, get pregnant young. Leave yourself unqualified for any good paying jobs, then be sure blame everyone else (or Bush, of course) for all of your problems.

Didnt Bush slack off, do drugs and get women pregnant? oh right, she got an abortion. hhaaa haa

As for your "terrorism isn't worth worrying about" mantra, something tells me that if everything about our country was the same, but a Dem was in office (even a sexual predator Dem President with a large supply if cigars and interns) you would be singing a different tune.

You guessed wrong!! I almost hate clinton!! He was head of DLC! continued the disasterous economic trade policies that Reagan started!! Total sellout.

 

[GotZoom]

Didnt Bush slack off, do drugs and get women pregnant? oh right, she got an abortion. hhaaa haa


You guessed wrong!! I almost hate clinton!! He was head of DLC! continued the disasterous economic trade policies that Reagan started!! Total sellout.

And where did this come from?

As they say.... Link please. I want to read about this.