Wow, I argue with Animal before bed and wake up to 40 posts...
1.) Eagler - I think I share your mindset 100% when it comes to this matter simply by reading your posts. Im also willing to bet $$ that youre a military man. No "educated" civilian could possibily think so clearly.
2.) Elf - The Kiwi issue is in response to Vulcans post. Whatever your talking about isnt being taught.
3.) Thrawn and Leslie - I like to think I argued against his points rather well. There are four or five older students (Both grad and undergrad) in the class and the older ones (30 years+) seemed to take serious offense to what this kid was saying. I understand that you can only take what I describe the event as, but this kid sounded like an Islamic whacko.
We even have 7 students from the region - Egypt, Turkey, and Lebannon. These students were foaming at the mouth to attack this kid. The Middle Easterners thought we Americans were CRAZY for not attacking sooner and with more force. They seemed to be more patriotic than those born of this soil.
As far as the professer goes, he is very, very good IMO. He is from Western Africa (forget which country) and brings alot of international views to his teachings. He had absolutely no control of the class after about 10 minutes - rare for him.
There are also 4 ex/current servicemen in the class - they/we also seemed to share the idea that what was coming out of this kid's mouth was rediculous.
We argued alot of his points into non-existance. One individual who crewed a Navy P-3 over the gulf explained that every piece of hardware that came up on his scope was of Soviet origin. This was news to this kid, as he had only minutes before stated that all the weaponry in the region was sold by America.
Another guy explained that he knew two officers in the Pentagon who were killed after this kid stated that the Pentagon was not a military target because it was filled with civilians.
There were so many simply idiotic arguments that he brought forth, and all that could be defended were - but alot of the psychobabble, which I STILL SEE as anti-American was simply unable to be comprehended.
When someone gets red in the face and starts to raise his voice about how American federal organizations use civilian buildings as shields and how we oppress the people of the world... blah blah blah...
His entire argument hinged on convincing us that "If we're all nice and see the error of our ways, this wont happen again." In other words, pull out of the middle east, stop exploiting, and taking advantage of other nations.
I see this as horseshit. It may be a sideeffect of my age/lack of experience/young "firepisser" mentality but my opinion is STILL that our response to these attacks should be absolutely devastating... diddly em... I will be the first one to march in.
I brought up the point that while we are focusing so much on "why" the attacks occured, we're not focusing enough on "why" the attacks occured.
Let me explain:
We know that the attacks are result of (Insert argument of choice here) but why did Bin Laden and Co. actually do it? Blowing up buildings seems a bit over the top because you dont like the decisions someone makes.
If you look at how wars are fought in the two cultures involved here, European/Western and Middle Eastern, whats the big difference? Geography.
If you go back and look at European conflicts from 900-1300AD and even earlier, whats the standard fair? You march an army to the gates of the castle controlling the territory of your opponent and state "Here are our demands, meet them by this time or we will attack."
If you look at Middle Eastern conflicts, how are they different? The attack first and then after they have sacked and taken the town/territory they contact the previous owner and state "Here are our demands, meet them or we wont be returning this land to you."
Why is this? Geography. You can sustain an army in Europe for weeks, maybe even months off the land - water, food, etc. In the desert/mountains of the Mid East, you cant do it. There is no water and nothing to live off of. You must attack first and negotiate for the return of the attacked area.
This behavior has filtered down and is even present today. Saddam, may his soul shortly burn in hell, exibited this very same behavior in Kuwait. What did he do? He invaded, stole everything, and buy time the Coalition (European mentality) saw that their demands were not being met (him leaving), they attacked.
I believe this is why we were simply "attacked" instead of "very stongly encouraged." We see it as an insult, but in fact, this is how people in that region of the world are used to fighting.
GRUNHERZ: Glad Im not the only one. I go to a school in North Eastern Pennsylvania. Strange mix of people here - but the university itself is about as Liberal as you can be (Liberal in the US Media sense, not its actual definition). From the "tone" of your post, I see you know exactly the type of person I am describing.
Oedipus: Your stormtrooper comment officially makes you a member of the peanut gallery. Kindly go sit down. IMHO, "stormtrooper" mentailty is close to what is needed here - most of the people I come into contact with hate America more than Bin Laden does. When you see students coming DAMN CLOSE to CELEBRATING the attacks, it makes you want to puke. So yes, SNUFF THEM OUT! diddly them too - send them over to Iraq before we turn it into a self-lighting, glass floored, parking lot.
In addition, do you speak of the Israeli "stormtroopers" in your statement as well? Do you look down upon their nationalism when they retaliate for attacks on their soveriengty? The only thing that will stop these attacks is to march into the area and say "enough is enough." In a situation like this, a single authority needs to be in control - do you want that authority to be "pro-western" or "anti-everything?"
As for attacking Iraq giving these people more of a reason to fly more "not-so-smart bombs" into buildings, I agree. But in a situation like this, sacrifices need to be made. If violence is the only thing these people understand and respect, I say give it to them. Anyone who doesnt see further losses in this "forever war" is fooling themselves.
More attacks will be made, more people will die. But HOW MANY MORE LIVES LOST will it take for most people take a step back and say what they should have said A YEAR AGO!?!?!
"...Hey... wait a minute... this is roadkill!!!"
