MikeK
Gold Member
(Excerpt)MikeK, 9thIDdoc, et al,
This is too funny.
(COMMENT)You probably have based this conclusion on the notion that the 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center is analogous to the attack on Pearl Harbor. But the following circumstances declare that reasoning to be flawed.[...]
The fighting the ME is no more or less immoral than our war against Japan for exactly the same reasons.
The attack on Pearl Harbor was an act of war by the military forces of a recognized nation. The attack on the World Trade Center was a monumental criminal act, not an act of war. If in his 1993 sabotage effort Ramseh Yousef had positioned his van in front of rather then behind a support column of World Trade Center Tower One the huge bomb inside would successfully have toppled that building onto several blocks of downtown Manhattan, which would have done more damage and caused more deaths than did the 9/11/2001 attack.
The 9/11 attack was not an act of war any more than was Ramseh Yousef's failed attempt to bring down Tower One, mainly because it was not implemented by the government of any recognized nation. It was a crime. A well-planned, well-executed criminal act, perpetrated by a loosely organized group of fanatical Islamists in response to America's support of Israel and our military presence on the holy ground of Mecca.
The Pearl Harbor bombing was effected by the air force of the Japanese Empire, a nation with the military capability to invade and occupy the United States. Our conflict with Japan was a war in every sense of the word. Our actions in the Middle East are, without exception, unnecessary military aggressions occurring far in excess of the need to retaliate for a crime committed by an elusive cult of religious fanatics.
US troops never went to Mecca or anywhere near it that I am aware.
This is a case of someone trying to make a justification where none is to be made. We are taking about barbaric Arab Islamic fundamentalist.
Most Respectfully,
R
[...]"The drastically reduced American profile could simplify the government's position among Saudis who espouse Osama bin Laden's contention that the American military foothold was an affront to the kingdom's sovereignty. For years, the American presence not far from Islam's two holiest sites, at Mecca and Medina, has provided Al Qaeda with an important rallying cry."[...]
Last American Combat Troops Quit Saudi Arabia - NYTimes.com
(Close)
The Prince Sultan airbase was established on holy ground in Saudi Arabia supposedly to facilitate H.W. Bush's 1990 air assault on Iraq (the "Gulf War"). The fact that it remained there for years rather than being promptly removed as promised was bin Laden's stated secondary provocation for the 9/11 attack, the primary provocation being U.S. support of Israel. If you'd like to read the PBS Frontline transcript of the 1998 interview in which bin Laden made this issue, demand, and threat quite clear, just ask and I'll post it.
The reason G.W. Bush is credited with "keeping us safe" from further attacks after 9/11 is he quietly complied with bin Laden's demands by removing the airbase and by pressuring Sharon to evict settlers from the Gaza region.