Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      xNerRadx wrote:

      Your not an American so how would you know how we felt at all. Your making stupid assumption.

      I know as an American, it is difficult to admit just like an impotent man can't admit to his impotence in public. You outrage at my analysis is only but expected.

      I made a reasoned conclusion. If everyone had to be the group they are making a profile on, the fields of sociology and psychology would have become obsolete. There would have been no police, criminal or legal systems.

      Americans reacted in a very immature and schoolboy jingoistic way - what with shouting "USA! USA!" at the devastation site and shooting ethnic minorities. Like Andy implied, for most Americans, the WTC attacks were not personal at all; it was national. Their jingoistic and over-the-top reactions were not normal for feeling devastation, it was a clear case of humiliation.

      xNerRadx wrote:

      If anything, we felt violated.

      Yeah, because of the humiliation, like a crime boss who got raped in prison.

      xNerRadx wrote:


      I'm just being logical. It may be hypocritical, but it's logical. Why would a English man have the same national pride for the U.S. as an American man? Well, unless they are native to this country.

      It is illogical. The terrorists didn't represent any nation, the attack was from a band of mercenaries against some economic and military infrastructure. Where does national pride come in? Unless of course, the attacks represent a shame at your own national impotence.

      Americans felt a national humiliation after the WTC attacks, whether you can salvage your pride by admitting it or not.

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      Sash wrote:

      I know as an American, it is difficult to admit just like an impotent man can't admit to his impotence in public. You outrage at my analysis is only but expected.

      I made a reasoned conclusion. If everyone had to be the group they are making a profile on, the fields of sociology and psychology would have become obsolete. There would have been no police, criminal or legal systems.

      Americans reacted in a very immature and schoolboy jingoistic way - what with shouting "USA! USA!" at the devastation site and shooting ethnic minorities. Like Andy implied, for most Americans, the WTC attacks were not personal at all; it was national. Their jingoistic and over-the-top reactions were not normal for feeling devastation, it was a clear case of humiliation.


      Yeah, because of the humiliation, like a crime boss who got raped in prison.


      It is illogical. The terrorists didn't represent any nation, the attack was from a band of mercenaries against some economic and military infrastructure. Where does national pride come in? Unless of course, the attacks represent a shame at your own national impotence.

      Americans felt a national humiliation after the WTC attacks, whether you can salvage your pride by admitting it or not.


      I'm sorry but no, I felt no humiliation what's so ever. But then I again I was a little too young. But when I got old enough to understand what happened, I still didn't feel any humiliation. Shit happens. I don't think we had a reason to be humiliated. We had a reason to be scared and pissed. Scared for our lives and pissed that psychos were able to slip past security and cause such a tragedy. Who has time to be humiliated when their too busy mourning losses? Not only did I not feel any humiliation, but you're the only person I've heard that had that reaction. There's nothing wrong with that but I'm just saying that's just not what I've experienced personally and from people around me.

      And when I was talking about nationalism, I wasn't referring to what your talking about. I was referring to what someone said about us being humiliated.

      Edit: After searching "humiliation+9/11" on google. Apparently there was a national humiliation. I never experienced that at all or had ever heard of it.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by xNerRadx ().

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      DamnImGood wrote:

      Terrorism is definitely overplayed in North America. I've said it before and I'll say it again: 9/11 worked in favour of the United States. It created a sense of nationalism and unity. As George Carlin simply put it, "It takes a tragedy for us to care for one another". It rallied the country as whole and was easily the sole reason the majority of people supported the invasion of Afghanistan, and to a lesser extent, Iraq.

      9/11 is unquestionably the launching pad for the War on Terrorism, which is not only a stupid concept, but also a stupid term. Everything violent is terrorism. The Nazis technically committed terrorism. So now the US military has backing it needs to invade innocent nations, all under the pretense of the "war on terror".

      It's unfortunate those 3,000 people were sacrificed and treated like nothing but pawns.
      I couldn't have said it better myself. When everything was going on, when the war in Afghanistan was being pushed forward, I was far too young to understand what was really going on. The way I see it is this. I hate to quote a Facebook page about having someone hurt you romantically, but it does apply to this. Something along the lines of: The best revenge? Don't let them know that it hurt.

      Now, you can't take it literally, but you get the idea. It's obvious that they did hurt us in many aspects, but to stoop to their level and kill their people is just absurd in my eyes. We should've kept on going and showed them that we're strong regardless of whether or not a tragedy occurred. Terrorism only works when they put us in a state of fear, that's the whole point. And they succeeded. We can invade as many damn countries as we want, but that will only reinforce the fact that was they did worked.
      [CENTER]
      [CENTER]The only angels we need invoke are those of our better nature; reason, honesty and love.
      The only demons we need fear are those that lurk inside every human mind; ignorance, hatred, greed, and faith.
      [/CENTER]

      [/CENTER]

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      Christopher wrote:

      I couldn't have said it better myself. When everything was going on, when the war in Afghanistan was being pushed forward, I was far too young to understand what was really going on. The way I see it is this. I hate to quote a Facebook page about having someone hurt you romantically, but it does apply to this. Something along the lines of: The best revenge? Don't let them know that it hurt.

      Now, you can't take it literally, but you get the idea. It's obvious that they did hurt us in many aspects, but to stoop to their level and kill their people is just absurd in my eyes. We should've kept on going and showed them that we're strong regardless of whether or not a tragedy occurred. Terrorism only works when they put us in a state of fear, that's the whole point. And they succeeded. We can invade as many damn countries as we want, but that will only reinforce the fact that was they did worked.


      You're saying we should've sat and done nothing but mourn? Wouldn't that have made us look like bitches?

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      xNerRadx wrote:

      You're saying we should've sat and done nothing but mourn? Wouldn't that have made us look like bitches?
      It's not about looking tough, it's about doing what's right. However, right and wrong are subjective. I believe many were diluted into believe that it was the right thing to do, I believe it wasn't in retrospect. I personally believe we should've spent all that money on securing our borders, and beefing up homeland security to prevent future attacks. I've believe in prevention, not invasion.

      DamnImGood wrote:

      I think my feelings are different than most, as I personally believe it was an inside job.

      I know, I know... inb4tinfoilhats.
      I don't completely dismiss the idea, I just haven't done enough looking-into-it to really think it's plausible. I always examine new ideas with an open mind.
      [CENTER]
      [CENTER]The only angels we need invoke are those of our better nature; reason, honesty and love.
      The only demons we need fear are those that lurk inside every human mind; ignorance, hatred, greed, and faith.
      [/CENTER]

      [/CENTER]

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      Christopher wrote:

      It's not about looking tough, it's about doing what's right.


      But if we don't appear tough that's grounds for us to be attacked again (let's not forget they missed their main target, the white house). And if their military was strong enough they might have tried an invasion. If invading them was wrong then I don't want to be right.

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      xNerRadx wrote:

      But if we don't appear tough that's grounds for us to be attacked again (let's not forget they missed their main target, the white house). And if their military was strong enough they might have tried an invasion. If invading them was wrong then I don't want to be right.
      It's possible to be tough without doing unnecessary things. I don't think it was a good idea in retrospect because it escalated into a bigger problem. Like I said, we can be tough by making our security here at home tighter. I don't see the point in attacking them, because it's the kind of organization the replenishes itself when it's hurt. Kill the head, and the next in command takes over. The best idea in my opinion is to keep them out.
      [CENTER]
      [CENTER]The only angels we need invoke are those of our better nature; reason, honesty and love.
      The only demons we need fear are those that lurk inside every human mind; ignorance, hatred, greed, and faith.
      [/CENTER]

      [/CENTER]

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      xNerRadx wrote:

      But if we don't appear tough that's grounds for us to be attacked again (let's not forget they missed their main target, the white house). And IF their military was strong enough they might have tried an invasion. If invading them was wrong then I don't want to be right.


      I'm sorry maybe I read my own post wrong?... But I could've sworn that bold sentence meant that their military isn't strong enough to try an invasion. I'm simply analyzing a scenario.

    • Re: Terrorism - is it being overplayed?

      xNerRadx wrote:

      I'm sorry but no, I felt no humiliation what's so ever. But then I again I was a little too young.

      That. You were too young to understand the event from a political perspective, so you just took whatever you heard and read in news at face value. I don't think even today you have matured to understand the political significance of this attacks, if you think it is all about the devastation (which is as it is put in TV).

      xNerRadx wrote:

      Not only did I not feel any humiliation, but you're the only person I've heard that had that reaction.

      As un-American as I can be, I cannot possibly be humiliated. I sympathised with Americans in the beginning, since as a teenager I looked at it the way you did. However, as I grew politically mature and more aware, I understood why it happened and why Americans had it coming.

      The humiliation isn't something advertised in the Anglo-America media. It is like a mafia boss getting anally raped, he isn't going to talk about it after he gets out of prison. It will kill his image of machismo amongst his peers, but it is understood.

      xNerRadx wrote:

      And if their military was strong enough they might have tried an invasion. If invading them was wrong then I don't want to be right.

      Military? Invading them? You are dumber than I thought. Al Qaeda is an international mercenary organisation. It has no territory, no military and absolutely no postcode. You can't wage a war against a concept or a invade global organisation, it is absurd. It is like punching air.

      Aannddyy wrote:


      My reaction exactly. I realised a day too late that I was arguing with an idiot.