|
Post by Pilch on Sept 6, 2011 12:59:56 GMT 1
can get away from it this week so wondered what your views are as to what actually happened
I'm always one for a nice conspiracy theory but i don't go along with the secret service blowing up the towers, crashing the planes and bombing the pentagon etc
whats the point ?, simply flying one plane into one wtc would have been enough to go to war
damn terrorists for me
|
|
|
Post by SeanBroseley on Sept 6, 2011 13:15:13 GMT 1
I doubt Bin Laden thought three out of four jets would be allowed to hit their intended targets. It's quite mind-boggling that something so against the odds actually came off to that extent.
Is it just me or has the world been a worse place ever since?
|
|
|
Post by theshrews81 on Sept 6, 2011 13:23:18 GMT 1
I doubt Bin Laden thought three out of four jets would be allowed to hit their intended targets. It's quite mind-boggling that something so against the odds actually came off to that extent. Is it just me or has the world been a worse place ever since? or has it just been highlighted more?
|
|
|
Post by stuttgartershrew on Sept 6, 2011 14:16:21 GMT 1
can get away from it this week so wondered what your views are as to what actually happened I'm always one for a nice conspiracy theory but i don't go along with the secret service blowing up the towers, crashing the planes and bombing the pentagon etc whats the point ?, simply flying one plane into one wtc would have been enough to go to war damn terrorists for me Yeah, I'd go along with that... People look to their inability to stop the attacks or the lack of response to suggest that the powers that be allowed the attacks to continue for their own benefit. But I just don’t think you can prepare for anything like that first time around, it does not surprise me at all that faced with that the response was so chaotic and ineffective.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Sept 6, 2011 14:37:22 GMT 1
Very successful terrorist attack - unprecedented and therefore unexpected. Conspiracy theories are utterly ridiculous - since when have governments needed to go to such extremes to pursue wars?
And the world has certainly been a far worse place ever since. I grew up at a time when it seemed unthinkable that Britain would fight another war (leaving Ireland to one side). That's why the Falklands was such a shock. Now it seems to be expected that we'll always be fighting somewhere.
Anyone remember the surge of optimism when the Berlin Wall came down and dictatorships fell all across Eastern Europe? That was nice while it lasted.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2011 16:10:37 GMT 1
Still find it hard at times to believe it actually happened, the pictures of the plane hitting the towers and people jumping to their deaths from a thousand feet is just beyond imagination and is without question one of the worst attrocities in modern history.
I also like a good conspiracy theory but find it just too unimaginable that the US would do this to themselves for whatever reason. Perhaps i am just a little nieve?
Something that does stick in my throat a little when everyone is giving this so much attention is how little thought and attention is given to mass murder and genocide happening elsewhere, particularly Palestine, where hundreds of thousands more have been murdered over the last 50 years, yet no one is really interested in splashing their story or their injustice across every channel.
|
|
|
Post by The Shropshire Tenor on Sept 6, 2011 17:03:19 GMT 1
As someone wrote recently, conspiracy theorists are really aliens who have come to earth on a mission to make humans even more stupid than they already are.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Sept 6, 2011 18:15:35 GMT 1
As someone wrote recently, conspiracy theorists are really aliens who have come to earth on a mission to make humans even more stupid than they already are. I'll second that. My brother has an acquaintance who believes the moon is an artificial construction (by humans I think but let's not go into details). Apparently, you can still see the ladders. There are books on this - I've seen one.
|
|
hertfordshrew
Midland League Division Two
Following Salop from a safe distance.
Posts: 140
|
Post by hertfordshrew on Sept 6, 2011 19:53:18 GMT 1
Still find it hard at times to believe it actually happened, the pictures of the plane hitting the towers and people jumping to their deaths from a thousand feet is just beyond imagination and is without question one of the worst attrocities in modern history. Something that does stick in my throat a little when everyone is giving this so much attention is how little thought and attention is given to mass murder and genocide happening elsewhere, particularly Palestine, where hundreds of thousands more have been murdered over the last 50 years, yet no one is really interested in splashing their story or their injustice across every channel. Good post.
|
|
|
Post by Dancin on Sept 6, 2011 20:24:56 GMT 1
The view I wish for! Seriously, I like at some point 10-20 years from now something will come out that will shock the American nation to it's core! Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on Sept 6, 2011 21:15:18 GMT 1
The view I wish for! Seriously, I like at some point 10-20 years from now something will come out that will shock the American nation to it's core! have you been drinking by any chance ?
|
|
|
Post by mattmw on Sept 6, 2011 22:33:52 GMT 1
Agree with Matron that the issues in the middle east have been glossed over in the reaction to 9/11
The terrorists claimed they were attacking the US for their support for Israel - yet the west's reaction has been to invade Iraq and Afghanistan with little evidence this has made anyone of us any safer from terrorism, whilst many of our servicemen and women have been killed and injured and thousands of civilians suffering the same fate
We're now also starting to see how the west got in bed with some iffy characters in the middle east as part of the war on terror?
Meanwhile all we do to tackle the Palestine and Israel issue is to send Tony Blair to sort it out.
I can't help think if we had done nothing what so ever in reaction to 9/11 we'd be in no more danger from terrorism than we are now
|
|
|
Post by saladsaladsalad on Sept 6, 2011 22:42:49 GMT 1
Very successful terrorist attack - unprecedented and therefore unexpected. Conspiracy theories are utterly ridiculous - since when have governments needed to go to such extremes to pursue wars? And the world has certainly been a far worse place ever since. I grew up at a time when it seemed unthinkable that Britain would fight another war (leaving Ireland to one side). That's why the Falklands was such a shock. Now it seems to be expected that we'll always be fighting somewhere. Anyone remember the surge of optimism when the Berlin Wall came down and dictatorships fell all across Eastern Europe? That was nice while it lasted. An intriguing post for me, as I don't see any period in our recent history where it was unthinkable we would fight another war. WW2 Korea Vietnam (possible but abstained) Russia (possible WW3) Falklands Iraq Afghanistan Iraq again During the 50's & 60's we were on high alert for (cold) war against Russia, the sheer amount of now disused installations is testament to that time.
|
|
|
Post by saladsaladsalad on Sept 6, 2011 22:46:29 GMT 1
I can't help think if we had done nothing what so ever in reaction to 9/11 we'd be in no more danger from terrorism than we are now Why not pop into a few parallel universes and see if your prediction is spot on?
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Sept 7, 2011 1:16:48 GMT 1
Something that does stick in my throat a little when everyone is giving this so much attention is how little thought and attention is given to mass murder and genocide happening elsewhere, particularly Palestine, where hundreds of thousands more have been murdered over the last 50 years, yet no one is really interested in splashing their story or their injustice across every channel. Man’s inhumanity to man Pab. Incredible how we so easily turn a blind eye to the suffering going on around us, and just how easily we accept or explain it away. Currently one of the largest famines to hit Africa in the last 25 years is set to kill nearly 1 million people. People, of all ages. Families like yours and mine. Children who cannot comprehend why they are in such agonising pain; simply because they lack food. Something which can be provided so easily should we all have the combined desire to end suffering such as this. 1 Million Individual tragedies. Crises such as this fuel the vicious circle of hate and resentment. Individual, perceived tragedies drove the terrorists to act. Their actions reverberating through history; keeping the momentum going. Who can say how the post 9/11 generation has been affected. What future atrocities will be committed in the name of revenge? Who is to say that these atrocities are not currently occurring? Until we really learn to live together, look after each other, we will continue to repeat our mistakes. I’m not a tree hugging liberal, but if you’ve not seen true despair, true raw emotion, I think my point of view will be difficult to comprehend. We live in the year 2011 yet we often still act like tribal barbarians.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Sept 7, 2011 7:58:43 GMT 1
What happened on 9/11 was terrible, but I am getting totally fed up with the medias total overkill on the 10th anniversary. Yes we need to remember but today there are far more urgent news that needs to be addressed.
What are the west doing about Syria isn't Assad murdering his own people.
The Palestine / Israel conflict will never be resolved until the USA stops writing blank cheques for the Israelis and forces them to the negotiating table.
The technology is available to ensure there is never another famine in the Horn of Africa all that is needed is for Governments of the developed countries to realise that hunger and despair are the greatest recruiting sergeant for the terrorists of the world. It should not be down to individuals to save the lives of thousands of the victims of famine.
The west has problems but there are not many dying as the result of debt, it is time we demanded our government started being a world leader in tackling world problems.
|
|
|
Post by shrewinjapan on Sept 7, 2011 9:18:39 GMT 1
it is time we demanded our government started being a world leader in tackling world problems. Is it buggery - we are not an international police force. Agree with the Doc on this. It is time we started looking to solve our own problems and put our own house in order, rather than sticking our nose into other countries business. If there are humanitarian problems overseas lets encourage the UN to take action, not take it upon ourselves (and America/NATO) to police the world.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Sept 7, 2011 10:13:33 GMT 1
Is it buggery - we are not an international police force. Agree with the Doc on this. It is time we started looking to solve our own problems and put our own house in order, rather than sticking our nose into other countries business. If there are humanitarian problems overseas lets encourage the UN to take action, not take it upon ourselves (and America/NATO) to police the world. Disagree. My reason, yes we have our own house to keep in order, but by defaulting to the staid position of 'getting the UN' involved, all we do is drag the timescales sideways. Massively. Yes the UN has it's place on the world stage, but its a slow beast toget turning, and even when in motion can be pretty ineffective. Srebrenica ring a bell? The AU is currently operating in Somalia and can not get a handle on things. The UN will fare no better. Indeed, many blame the pull out of US troops in Somalia in 1993 as the catalyst of current humanitaria crisis there. The problem, we do need a world police force that is flexible, adaptable and surgical. NATO is not the right tool; and the UN is simply too slow a beast to be effective in acute situations. This capability currently only exists in key Western armed forces.
|
|
|
Post by neilsalop on Sept 7, 2011 11:21:37 GMT 1
The problem, we do need a world police force that is flexible, adaptable and surgical. NATO is not the right tool; and the UN is simply too slow a beast to be effective in acute situations. This capability currently only exists in key Western armed forces. The problem is that the UK and the US are the only ones prepared to take any responsibilty for this and successive governments have taken us into conflicts at the same time as cutting costs and corners. How long are the British armed forces going to be able to stand alongside the Americans if we continue to cut their capabilities? We are continually weakening our defences by sending troops to all corners of the world, but at the same time are annoying more and more people thus making ourselves a target for even more extremist attacks.
|
|
|
Post by petetheloon on Sept 7, 2011 11:58:21 GMT 1
The one thing I remember was the Chris Morris pullout in the Observer. Have a look at this if you've not seen. A very close to the bone satirical view, as you would expect from him observer.guardian.co.uk/review/page/0,,671683,00.html
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Sept 7, 2011 14:01:49 GMT 1
Is it buggery - we are not an international police force. Agree with the Doc on this. It is time we started looking to solve our own problems and put our own house in order, rather than sticking our nose into other countries business. If there are humanitarian problems overseas lets encourage the UN to take action, not take it upon ourselves (and America/NATO) to police the world. What you and Doc fail to realise is that in the world today a country cannot ignore what is happening around the world. We in Britain are affected by earthquakes in Japan, loans crisis in USA, debt crisis in Europe. The world literally gets smaller by the day. Setting an example to other countries does not mean we need to be the world police it means we lead by example. We provide support for the poorest and weakest. The last thing we do is become isolationists because that will ultimately lead to the destruction of society in this country. Every decision a government makes has consequences unfortunately our leaders often fail to recognise the effects of their decisions.
|
|
|
Post by shrewinjapan on Sept 7, 2011 14:27:09 GMT 1
I fully realise the global interconnectedness of the modern world, thank you. I didn't say we should ignore what's going on and bury our heads in sand, merely that I think it is time ourselves and the US stopped steaming into foreign disputes as if we were some kind of world security force. We can't solve all the world's problems and it is morally dubious that we choose some situations to involve ourselves in but keep silent and well out of others. The UN may be slow moving, but as things stand now it is that organization that has a mandate to intervene and that is where we should strive to exert influence i.m.o. And if it isn't working we should try to change it - we should probably start by reforming the present voting and veto system of the Security Council.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Sept 7, 2011 14:27:27 GMT 1
The problem, we do need a world police force that is flexible, adaptable and surgical. NATO is not the right tool; and the UN is simply too slow a beast to be effective in acute situations. This capability currently only exists in key Western armed forces. The problem is that the UK and the US are the only ones prepared to take any responsibilty for this and successive governments have taken us into conflicts at the same time as cutting costs and corners. How long are the British armed forces going to be able to stand alongside the Americans if we continue to cut their capabilities? We are continually weakening our defences by sending troops to all corners of the world, but at the same time are annoying more and more people thus making ourselves a target for even more extremist attacks. I don't disagree with you Neil. I'm just saying that the 'international community' is currently neither geared up for or has the will to solve global problems which ultimately affect us all. If we don't intervene in Somali, we create a generation of hate filled locals who rightly resent how the world stood by as they starved to death. If we do, know doubt this will feed the Islamist flames of white christian westerners corrupting the locals. A complex issue that is repeated the world over. Humanity. A real contradiction.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Sept 7, 2011 14:31:39 GMT 1
I fully realise the global interconnectedness of the modern world, thank you. I didn't say we should ignore what's going on and bury our heads in sand, merely that I think it is time ourselves and the US stopped steaming into foreign disputes as if we were some kind of world security force. We can't solve all the world's problems and it is morally dubious that we choose some situations to involve ourselves in but keep silent and well out of others. The UN may be slow moving, but as things stand now it is that organization that has a mandate to intervene and that is where we should strive to exert influence i.m.o. And if it isn't working we should try to change it - we should probably start by reforming the present voting and veto system of the Security Council. I wasn't trying to lecture, merely outline my view. I don't support the notion that we and the US should be a world police force, merely stating that we are currently the only ones with the will and capability. And yes, I agree we shouldn't cherry pick based on oil reserves (or diamonds as in Sierra Leone). And I'm glad we concur the UN needs to adapt, or be replaced by something which can actually respond with speed. It's easy for us to say let the UN bring their resolutions and then we act. In that time, thousands of lives could be lost. It needs to adapt, or be supplimented by something that meets our new global needs.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Sept 7, 2011 15:16:42 GMT 1
I agree we shouldn't cherry pick based on oil reserves Who could disagree with that in principle? However, it would be hypocritical of us to blame "our leaders" for doing this when we know the country would immediately be up in arms the moment the oil supply lines were cut. The practical reality is that, if we're going to intervene anywhere, it's only logical to expect this to be where we have a direct interest, such as securing energy supplies. There's nothing evil about that, it's just human nature. The alternative is we intervene everywhere (impossible) or nowhere (arguably the best option of all). When we, as a population, are ready to sacrifice self interest for principle, then we can insist that our leaders do the same.
|
|
|
Post by venceremos on Sept 7, 2011 15:24:28 GMT 1
Very successful terrorist attack - unprecedented and therefore unexpected. Conspiracy theories are utterly ridiculous - since when have governments needed to go to such extremes to pursue wars? And the world has certainly been a far worse place ever since. I grew up at a time when it seemed unthinkable that Britain would fight another war (leaving Ireland to one side). That's why the Falklands was such a shock. Now it seems to be expected that we'll always be fighting somewhere. Anyone remember the surge of optimism when the Berlin Wall came down and dictatorships fell all across Eastern Europe? That was nice while it lasted. An intriguing post for me, as I don't see any period in our recent history where it was unthinkable we would fight another war. WW2 Korea Vietnam (possible but abstained) Russia (possible WW3) Falklands Iraq Afghanistan Iraq again During the 50's & 60's we were on high alert for (cold) war against Russia, the sheer amount of now disused installations is testament to that time. Deep in the bunkers and in West Berlin they might have been on high alert but where I grew up in the 60s and 70s, nobody ever expected an actual war against the Warsaw Pact. Mutually Assured Destruction made this seem impossible. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, I remember the genuine fear of a friend that there might then be a war. That soon subsided and it was only the Falklands invasion in 1982 that brought home that we really could fight one. I emphasise the word "seem" - I'm talking about my perceptions at the time and those of people around me. There was never a possibility that we'd fight in Vietnam so, looking at your list, that leaves a 30 year gap between Korea and the Falklands. Cold war or not, the last 20 years of that period now seems like a time of lasting peace. We should be so lucky again.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Sept 7, 2011 15:35:40 GMT 1
I agree we shouldn't cherry pick based on oil reserves There's nothing evil about that, it's just human nature. The alternative is we intervene everywhere (impossible) or nowhere (arguably the best option of all). When we, as a population, are ready to sacrifice self interest for principle, then we can insist that our leaders do the same. Underlining my thrust, in my first post, man's inhumanity to man. Human nature needs to change for us to truly evolve. It's no good having a world wide aid to africa appeal every twenty years, if we're never going to be truly interested in fixing the underlying issues. And I don't think we have the collective will currently. The film The Day The Earth Stood Still seemed to hammer out that kind of message. That was originally released 60 years ago, and I'm sure it was not the first such story to carry a similar message. Unless some cataclysmic event happens, we will just all muddle on. Ironic how it takes a survival situation for us to pull together.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 7, 2011 16:08:58 GMT 1
The Palestine / Israel conflict will never be resolved until the USA stops writing blank cheques for the Israelis and forces them to the negotiating table. agree with you, but i think you may have the cheque book the wrong way round.
|
|
|
Post by Shrewed on Sept 7, 2011 16:23:56 GMT 1
An intriguing post for me, as I don't see any period in our recent history where it was unthinkable we would fight another war. WW2 Korea Vietnam (possible but abstained) Russia (possible WW3) Falklands Iraq Afghanistan Iraq again During the 50's & 60's we were on high alert for (cold) war against Russia, the sheer amount of now disused installations is testament to that time. Deep in the bunkers and in West Berlin they might have been on high alert but where I grew up in the 60s and 70s, nobody ever expected an actual war against the Warsaw Pact. Mutually Assured Destruction made this seem impossible. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, I remember the genuine fear of a friend that there might then be a war. That soon subsided and it was only the Falklands invasion in 1982 that brought home that we really could fight one. I emphasise the word "seem" - I'm talking about my perceptions at the time and those of people around me. There was never a possibility that we'd fight in Vietnam so, looking at your list, that leaves a 30 year gap between Korea and the Falklands. Cold war or not, the last 20 years of that period now seems like a time of lasting peace. We should be so lucky again. I guess you wasn't around in October 62, that was a worrying time.
|
|
|
Post by El Presidente on Sept 7, 2011 16:28:18 GMT 1
Deep in the bunkers and in West Berlin they might have been on high alert but where I grew up in the 60s and 70s, nobody ever expected an actual war against the Warsaw Pact. Mutually Assured Destruction made this seem impossible. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in 1979, I remember the genuine fear of a friend that there might then be a war. That soon subsided and it was only the Falklands invasion in 1982 that brought home that we really could fight one. I emphasise the word "seem" - I'm talking about my perceptions at the time and those of people around me. There was never a possibility that we'd fight in Vietnam so, looking at your list, that leaves a 30 year gap between Korea and the Falklands. Cold war or not, the last 20 years of that period now seems like a time of lasting peace. We should be so lucky again. I guess you wasn't around in October 62, that was a worrying time. My old man was in the Merchant Navy at the time. Sat 20 miles offshore from New York as their ship was not allowed to dock in case NY got nuked. Loneliest few weeks of his life he said.
|
|