World Trade Center

[Mergs]

Well, it seems that I have stirred up quite a hornet’s nest by my comments. I am going to attempt to answer each of them, and yes most of you, or at least part of you won't like or understand where I am coming from (based on your comments already). This is going to be lengthy, so you may want to print it out first.

First off I would like to apologize for my P.S. note. That WAS uncalled for, and I am sorry. But as for politicizing this, it is interesting that the Democrats are already screaming that the Administration should "drop its pipe dream of a National Missile Defense program and concentrate on Terrorism" 'Nuf said on that subject.

As for my professional assessment of the incident, it was just that, professional. Part of being a professional is the ability to separate yourself emotionally from the task at hand. For the past 24 years I have had to deal DAILY with the fact of my dying or sending/leading soldiers to their death. How many of you have ever had to make that kind of decision? DO NOT presume to think you understand that kind of responsibility unless you have been in that situation. The loss of life, especially in instances like this are always horrific. The loss of life period is horrific. Millions of people are killed in this country every year and that is horrific (at least to some, to others they aren’t even human beings). How many of you have seen “Saving Private Ryan”? or are planning to watch “Band of Brothers”? or “Schindler’s List”? I haven’t. I can’t. It hits too close to home.

The majority of us who post to this site on a regular basis are serious competitors. We have all come up against opponents that we personally despise as a person, but will acknowledge and admire their skill as a fencer. While this may or may not seem relevant to the discussion or may be trivial in comparison, the concept is the same. The same thing has happened throughout history, many a professional (and non-professional) soldier has admired his opponent’s abilities and skill while still being emotionally out to destroy them and wishing them dead or repulsed at their morals and actions. I think that Aldo Nadi was one of the most immoral, egotistical, self-serving bastards that walked the face of the earth, but I admire his skill and accomplishments as a fencer. Jochim Piper was a sadistic, psychopath, but a hell of a tactical commander. But, Erwin Rommel was a very moral upstanding person and a consummate professional, however he supported one of the most despicable regimes in history, but still recognized as the foremost field commander of mobile forces. No, it is not an “idiot” that can look at this professionally, it is someone that is dedicated enough to understand what it took to do it and be prepared to figure out how to keep it from happening again. (Damn, got hit by that fleche AGAIN!)

I find it mildly amusing that the person that calls me an “idiot” is the same one that prided himself on being able to “suck me into a discussion of military blunders and history”. Make up your mind, Mike.

Now to the subject of retaliation/retribution/revenge. To answer Dave’s statement about the Japanese underestimation of the US’s resolve and reaction to Pearl Harbor. Yes they did and that is well documented. However, the circumstances are dramatically different today than they were in 1941. First off there was a clearly defined enemy. Japan. There was a target to focus on and drive toward. Tokyo. There was organized aggression to go after. Manchuria, Nanking, etc. Also, the country was already on a semi-war footing. Factories were already gearing up for war materiel production; the National Guard had already been mobilized; a huge hospital was already being constructed in Washington DC to handle casualties (and, ironically, subsequently turned into one of yesterday’s targets); there was an active war in Europe that we were involved in, albeit clandestinely if not actively or overtly. Also, the country had just come out of or was in the process of coming out of one of the worst economic periods in the history of the country. People were hardened to the fact of doing whatever was necessary to survive; separating emotion from practicality; pulling together for the common good and survival. What was their reaction? They steeled themselves for further deprivation and signed up for service to the country in huge numbers.

What is the situation today? There is no definable enemy. Given the circumstantial evidence surrounding this attack, the method, the organization, the money involved, the targets, it is pretty safe to assume who is responsible. Where is his capital? What is his country? Where do we go to strike back? Are we at war? Four attacks over eight years, is that war? In my book, yes, but for the American people? I don’t think that they are willing to accept that fact and all it’s implications. They did for Desert Storm (definable enemy, clear end-state) but even then they weren’t really prepared for the potential cost. Unfortunately what we have done in the past 15 years has sent the wrong message to people. Panama, Grenada, Desert Storm, Somalia, Bosnia, and Kosovo casualties didn’t add up to one day’s worth of training accidents during WWII. The public outcry over the incident in Somalia because we lost 17 soldiers (as opposed to the over 500 they lost) was deafening. After that the potential for casualties has hamstrung every operation. No commander wants to “bet his bars” on the remote possibility that someone will get hurt, HURT, much less killed in accomplishing his mission. War is not a push button affair that results in little to no casualties on our side. 39 days of bombardment did not defeat the Republican Guard, it was a gun-tube to gun-tube, look them in the eye and bury the bayonet in their gut, brawl. The aforementioned movies are what war is about. Except we haven’t had one like that for at least a generation and that one was lost because the will of the people was lacking to really do what was necessary to win.

We are coming out of one of the best economic periods of our history and there is the fear of recession. We are more concerned with individual’s feelings and grief counseling than we are about the facts of what happened and what it is going to take in terms of what personal freedoms we are willing to forego to prevent this kind of thing from happening again. To illustrate that, look at the reaction of people around the country. Runs on gas stations and grocery stores in an attempt to get for themselves these “necessities” before anyone else can. Do unto others before they do unto you; What’s in it for me?; an Army of one. And what seems to be the attitude of most people? Gee, I can take a few moments out of my busy day to donate some blood or attend a prayer vigil and I’ve done my part and I go on with my life. Personally, I’d love to give blood, but I can’t. I’ve recently been sent to a nasty part of the world where I may have picked up something that would be passed on to someone else. Nice, and when do I die of this bug? Not that after all the vaccines and shots that any self-respecting bug could survive in my bloodstream! As for praying, I do it every day, all day.

To answer Moon, I am fervent about my belief and do believe that someday, those who are responsible will pay the ultimate price of damnation for it. But I also know that will not deter this kind of thing from happening again, especially when dealing with someone that believes just as strongly that they will achieve glory and heavenly salvation by dying for their faith. Deterrence works as long as the people and government are willing to execute on that deterrence. Armies, Navies and Air Forces exist for the sole purpose to deter aggression. Their mission is to hurt people and break things, end of sentence. And do it in the quickest and most violent, horrible means possible. The fact that they can be turned to humanitarian efforts is serendipitous (but unfortunately detracts from their primary mission and is diametrically opposed to that mission). But, because there is a possibility that these can be defeated or a country gives off the impression that it lacks the resolve to follow through to the final conclusion of employing that horrific tool of diplomacy, then that deterrence fails. Witness the mis-calculation of the Japanese in 1941. I have written before on deterrence in this forum, so if you want an example of how it has worked/failed during the past century it is there.

Finally, let me get to the core of why I feel that we, not only as a nation, but as a global community, do not have what it takes to exact justice for this act. It is summed up in Haze’s statement: “I hope however, that more innocent lives are not lost in bringing the perpetrators to justice.” We cannot get past the idea that there are “innocent” people that might get hurt. If this is war, there are no “innocents”. How do you distinguish the guilty from the innocent and still exact the swift justice that is being demanded? Who was innocent and who was guilty in Coventry, London, Antwerp, Hamburg, Dreseden, Berlin, Rotterdam, Stalingrad, Lenningrad, Screbinica, Mostar, Hirosima, Nagasaki, Nanking, Tokyo, Seoul? Did who ever did this consider the potential thousands of casualties as innocents? No, they didn’t, they thought of them as the enemey. And that is where they have the advantage over the rest of us. We hesitate before we act because we have to consider the impact of collateral damage. What happens to you on strip when you hesitate? You get hit.

By now most of you are thinking “What a cynical bastard Mergs is”. Maybe so, but 24 years of service to my country and the belief in it’s ideals and know what it takes to defend those ideals has made me that way. Believe it or not, that is what you really expect of us, but in most cases are loath to face that fact. Yes, this is a hot-button issue with me and maybe I am overreacting, but DAMN IT, I’M PISSED! I was working in that building four weeks ago and my fellow servicemembers were in there. The plane that hit the building missed my brother by 100’ as he was driving past the Building. I as much as anyone wants to go out as exact retribution, I want to be actively involved in that. But I can’t. And it hurts. And now that the immediate crisis is over, I can allow myself to feel that way. But I still have a job to do. And guess what? The sun came up this morning, just like it always does. And I thanked God for it and the blessings He has given my wife and me.

“It is the Soldier who prays for Peace the hardest. Because it is he who has to pay the ultimate price for its failure”

Regards,

Michael E. Mergens
COL, MI/AC, USAR

[edew]

I have never seen the need for retribution. Whether it's my family, my friends, or myself (well, in that case, the point is moot) who are counted as fatalities. Life goes on. Certainly we should determine who the perpetrators are, to prevent any recurrence. But what has happened has happened. It's sunk cost as far as I care to realize it. Move on to the future, with a look back to see how to prevent recurrence.

Missile shield? It won't work against the missiles they're supposed to protect us from, and it certainly won't work against continued terrorist attacks. Who knows what's the next mode of attack? Maybe a bomb on the SF Bay Bridge? A lot of the damage that is inflicted is the subsequent economic impact, if not the immediate death toll and material destruction. The US society and economy runs like a (sort of) fine-tuned engine. Throw a wrench in it and the whole thing grinds to a halt.

While many are quick to point at Osama bin Laden and is group, we (the US Gov't) must keep an open mind and view to make sure that we don't mistaken the perpetrators, thus aggravating the situation more as well as letting the guilty go free. What I don't want to see is some railroading of some presumed guilty parties, only to realize years or decades later that it was some other group. Who else could it be? Maybe rogue drug cartel groups, trying to destroy evidence contained in the WTC (and throwing off the scent with the cursory blast of the Pentagon)? Maybe some nut-case Tim McVeigh former military group who feel the US is being too global and the military too soft? Since I'm hardly close to the scene of the crime, my guesses are about as valuable as this opinion. But, consider the ramifications of what might occur if we had pursued Osama for the Oklahoma incident. Imagine the red-face plus continual "retributions" the US will receive had we exacted revenge for the Oklahoma incident on the wrong parties.

Do I sound like a peacenik? If so, that's because I know that returned aggression will never solve problems. If they were Middle-east fanatics, or a home-bred nut-case, we must ask ourselves why us? Why did they did this? If there is a reason for their hatred of us, then we must address that. If it was just some charismatic kook who managed to convince fifteen to twenty people to fly to their deaths, then we need to address our mental health programs. We can also consider latter such incidences as nothing other than "natural" disaster. It's natural in that such freak accidents don't have zero probability, and as far as the outcome is concerned, is no different than a natural disaster. For all we know, if it were the latter case, the instigator may have ridden one of the planes and there is no one alive to blame or prosecute.

[Fast Eddie]

It's interesting to see the variety of postings on this subject. Having served in the military, I can certainly understand Mergs point of view. I can also appreciate the idea that retaliation will not solve this problem. I doubt that most people will feel ambivalent about this horrific event which has touched all our lives. My prayers and sympathy go out to anyone who has been personally affected by this tragedy. God bless America, and all of us...

[Gav]

Mergs and Edew are right. You musn't allow your shock at yesterday cloud your thinking. There is no proof (so far) that any particular group has done this. Any rumours are exactly that (and speculative). If America attacks Afghanistan who do you think will take the brunt of this so called retribution? Not the terrorists (they're dead), probably not the planners (they're long gone), not the Taliban (who fought the Soviets FOR the usa) but ordinary people - just like those killed yesterday.

If this bin Laden is killed (even accidentally) by American forces he becomes a martyr. You serve HIS cause and attract yet more fanatics to his flag. If you kill this man and he HASN't done this then, you do former and destroy any support you might be able to get from the arab nations. America cannot afford that.

The long term repercussions for your country maybe greater than your your short term satisfaction.

[Sildar]

Mergs,
I can see where you're coming from, but I have to disagree about the 'innocent lives' part. Of course, you are right that war is inherently unpleasant, and horrible things happen and people die and so on. However, myself and many others are disturbed by the attitude that many have expressed which is basically "let's bomb some little middle eastern country into the ground, and that'll teach them!" It bothers us because an indescriminate self-righteous lust for vengeance against anyone even tangentially involved with the wrongs we have experienced is the the exact sentiment that drives most terrorist movements. Mentally it is all too easy to lump together some social, ethnic or religious group, label them "the Enemy" and therefore absolve ourselves of any responsibility for our actions past that point. That's what terrorist movements do, and that's why they do things like flying planes into buildings. Because they use that same view that there are no innocents and that all means are justified. Would you support a US counterattack in which we had suicide pilots fly planes full of civilians into building filled with more civilians? I doubt it; and I think there is a line you wouldn't cross, a distinction that you are ignoring.
Moreover, this mindset perpetuates rather than resolves and prevents conflicts; Isrealis and Palestineans, for example, are just as likely these days to retaliate against one another to avenge the most recent atrocity than a desire to resolve the conflict in any way.
I may be splitting hairs, but I am tired of hearing people saying 'justice' and meaning revenge. Personally I would humbly submit that healing the injury done to our surviving loved ones should be higher up on our list of priorities than lashing out at convenient targets as a salve to our wounded pride. Of course we want the engineers of this crime stopped and future occurences prevented, but we cannot do so effectively if our judgement is clouded. As any fencer should know, careless attacks based more upon frustration and anger than upon reason do us more harm than good, especially against sneaky and calculating adversaries.
When we strike, let it be with cold, focused determination, against a target we are certain is the correct one. And let us fight to protect that which we love more than to destroy that which we hate.
I think that's all I wanted to say.

[Mergs]

Sildar,

You missed my point. And then turned around and said the same thing. I never said that we should go in and indiscriminately pound some patch of earth into so much turned dirt (which we already have done numerous times, with no result). I said that there was no defined target or enemy armed forces to go after. In our society, it is up to the civilian government to decide what the final outcome is that it wants and commiunicate that to the miltary and then GET THE HELL OUT OF THE WAY and let us do what it is you pay us to do! Prime leadership principle, "Tell them what to do, not how to do it". Congress and the American media seem to ignore that middle part.

Funny, Israel didn't have the same level of problems it has had in the past few years before the establishment of the Palestinian Authority and the partition! Which was a reversal of it's policy and went away from what had established a measure of peace for them. But the resolve weakened with the resultant problems.

Again, tell me what the target is and I'll take it out with extreme prejudice, just don't put conditions on it that prevents me from doing it.

[Event Horizon]

Mergs, u said

For the past 24 years I have had to deal DAILY with the fact of my dying or sending/leading soldiers to their death. How many of you have ever had to make that kind of decision? DO NOT presume to think you understand that kind of responsibility unless you have been in that situation.

I think you are wrong to make this statement. I believe people who are not in that situation, and maybe never will be, can understand what kind of pressure and responsibility you go through. I'm not saying we know exactly but saying that we can understand the magnitude and implications of sending people off to fight and die.

[Buttercup]

edew, your point here was interesting:

"If they were Middle-east fanatics, or a home-bred nut-case, we must ask ourselves why us? Why did they did this? If there is a reason for their hatred of us, then we must address that."

I was in a discussion today with someone and he asked me what would I do if I arrived at home and found my family murdered, and the murderer was still in the house. Would I grab my gun, or I would I chat with him and ask him why he did it, and why does he hate us and try to learn his point of view?

I think putting it at this level makes it more realistic for me.

[its_me_mango]

yesterday i was on a bus and an old man starting hassling me about wwII and pearl harbor, it was the most disgusting thing i ever encountered, most normal people react sypathectially to each other in bad circumstances, but he was grinning and smiling and yakking about hiroshima and nagasaki, so finally i just said, well they're all sick, and i meant him too. anyway, the difficulty of public office and military life is understanding what the correct response is. it shouldn't include civilians, that was the number one rule, however, since the european conflict, civilians become more and more involved in conflicts, and that's because we mobilize on the ground, when you mobilize on the ground, more people will get involved, then you have air strikes and the targets are never completely free of the so-called civilian, but what then is a civilian. there are millions and millions of people involved in miliatry life, they're not civilians, across the world, the civilian population has dwindled and more people are heavily involved with military life, or quasi military life, that's why it's difficult to create and maintain "policies".

[ 09-12-2001: Message edited by: its_me_mango ]

[Iwant2bafencer]

That sucks mango. Today was so cool with everyones cooperation, and support. I was walking to my bus stop, on the bus to school, and coming home from school. About 90% of the houses that I saw had their flags out, and about 50% were at hlaf mast. (Some of them cant go to half, but they made it work.) It was awesome. I mean I know that probably sounds wierd saying awesome and stuff, but in a way it doesnt.
Mango why arent you in ne of the stories? Are we going to have to drag you inot them again?


------------------
Carpe Diem

[Sildar]

Mergs,
That I certainly agree with. It's just that I've heard many people saying things that on the surface sounded similar to what you were saying, but with a different message. I guess I was assuming a slant that wasn't there; my mistake.

[edew]

Originally posted by Buttercup:
<STRONG>edew, your point here was interesting:

"If they were Middle-east fanatics, or a home-bred nut-case, we must ask ourselves why us? Why did they did this? If there is a reason for their hatred of us, then we must address that."

I was in a discussion today with someone and he asked me what would I do if I arrived at home and found my family murdered, and the murderer was still in the house. Would I grab my gun, or I would I chat with him and ask him why he did it, and why does he hate us and try to learn his point of view?

I think putting it at this level makes it more realistic for me.</STRONG>

If you return home and see the murderers in your house, I'd suspect you'd grab your gun and start firing (and rightly so). But we don't have a murderer in the house. So the analogy breaks down. Would you, in this case, grab your gun, go down the neighborhood shooting up people's homes, especially that Jones guy who made leering remarks to your wife, or that Smith family with the darker complexion, or those Chan folks with the squinty eyes and shifty behaviour, or the turban wearing guys who like to walk around in sandals? That's the problem.

There's another problem, especially with this rationale for expecting some (others') innocent lives to be lost in a war. Presumably, this act was not rubber stamped by a foreign government. I don't think (although it's not impossible) that Iraq nor Iran gave a go-ahead to do this. So, the perps are not headed by a government of a country. Thus, they are not accountable to their citizens. In WWII, we can bomb Hiroshima and bring Japan to its knees because Japan's government led the war against the US. By hurting the citizens, it hurts the powers who oversee the citizenry. If it were Osama bin Laden, he oversees no citizenry. His actions are not accountable to anyone but himself and his group of fanatics. Killing innocent people, even if it were just part of a collateral damage, will only escalate the problem, not solve the problem. Their (bin Laden's) power is derived by having people see themselves as martyrs. Their power is being able to get people to die for their cause (such as those hijackers). People don't die for a cause without some reason, as irrational as it may be. Those reasons will precisely be that the US killed innocent people, and it will be even worse if in fact bin Laden was not involved in it. I mean, suppose we killed a bunch of Taliban innocents, along with some bin Laden partners, and we find out it's some Central American drug cartel group.

Lest people think I'm a total wimp, my idea is to find out who did it, relay that information to our friends in Israel, UK, France, Egypt, get them to send out several secret military special forces guys, and hunt those folks down. Then blind them, chop off their tongues, chop off their hands, and send them back alive as a message. It's what a Corleone would do. You send back a message that the US isn't to be trifled with. AND, the people who did the message sending are NOT the US, so our hands are clean. (Michael Corleone didn't personally kill Barzini, or Moe Green, or Tattaglia, or Stracci, or Cuneo -- loved the movie, the book's ok). You hire some people, show the perps you mean business, keep your nose clean, and they'll respect you, as well as not have anything to pin on you. Doing the Santino Corleone thing and go blasting away only escalate the blood-bath. You first try to "reason" with them. Then you break a few fingers. Then a few knee-caps. Then their clothes come back home wrapped around a fish.

[Foil Girl]

I haven't had time to revue the entire topic, but I noticed a little bit of squabbling. Please, guys, due to the current events, let's try and get along, alright? Anyways, this is the most terrible thing I've seen in my life. I was crying yesterday, and couldn't sleep last night because I couldn't get the screams of the people around the world trade center out of my head.

Around me, people are taking action. Our family has donated to the red cross, thousands have volunteered in Washington, NEw York, and the plane crash, people are donating blood. They're consoling their neighbors and friends, even total strangers. I think it's beautiful. Touching. This is the time for America to come together, and rise from the terrible happenings of Tuesday. My heart goes out to all the victims, their families, and the people of the united state just having to deal with this.

I urge you all to go on with your lives also. The terrorists are just that. Trying to create terror. If fear or depression makes you want to stay home, they've won. GO places, GO to work, Go to fencing.

GOD BLESS AMERICA AND IT'S PEOPLE

[ 09-12-2001: Message edited by: Foil Girl ]

[Iwant2bafencer]

Well said. I agree. Use your heads you guys. What if they came again. In your city this time?! It doesnt matter if you live in Tuson, Arizona or New York, New York! Think about it. If some group terrorists came and bombed or ran an airplane somewhere near you and one of your family, friends, fellow fencers, even the grumpy old lady down the street was killed. How would you feal if you knew that the last thing you said to them was cruel, or argumentative. Any thing of the sort.

Would you want that in your head the Rest of your LIFE?! I know I wouldn't.

God Bless America!

-----------------
Carpe Diem

[Mergs]

Interesting comments, especially Eric's about hiring someone else (that supposedly has the balls to do it) to "send a message" to who ever did this. What is wrong with us sending that same message. I know about 4,500 guys that would give vital parts of their manhood to do that, if given the chance. But we don't play that way. We let the the jet-jockeys pound the crap out of dirt and then declare victory, go home and pass out bronze medals to every one that remotely thought about participating. Reminds me of the Star Trek episode where the two worlds were at "war" and conducted cyber attacks and then hearded folks into disintegration chambers. Kirk intervened (yes and violated the Prime Directive) and gave them a REAL war, with all it's potnetial attendant horrors. I feel like we are like those folks. We have forgotten what war really is, and therefore are too eager to lash out with a few high-tech weapons against low-tech enemies, who by the way, understand all too well how to use low tech,cunning and planning to hit us. WTC - '93 - car bomb, Kobar Towers - car bomb, US Embassies, Africa - car bombs, USS Cole - rubber dinghy bomb, WTC/Pentagon - hijacked airliners with max fuel - what is high tech about these weapons? And what could we have really done to stop them? Not that the "entertainment" industry hasn't given them the ideas if they hadn't already thought of them. So tell me Eric, do we prescribe anger management classes for these folks that ordered this? Or do we do as you suggested and "send them a message"?

Foil Girl, sorry to burst your bubble sweetie, but welcome to the real world of adults that have to make difficult decisions and choices that affect the lives of many people. We disagree and we argue, but when we have to, we listen to all sides and then make a decision. And then pray to God that we have made the right one. Be glad that you are able to sit back and watch this happen in this microcosim of society. It's called democracy at work. Its tough to see how the duck really swims.

Event, as to your comment about thinking you know what it is like to make the kinds of decisions and do the kinds of things that are asked of military leaders, trust me, unless you have had to do it, you don't have a clue as to what you are talking about. I had a supervisor at a large civilian company when I left the Active Army say basically the same thing you did, that is, as a supervisor he knew what kinds of things I had done. And then I asked him, "How many calls at 3AM have you received to come downtown to get one of your employees out of jail for being drunk?", "Well, none, of course they wouldn't call me!", "How many letters have you written to parents telling them of their son's death while in your charge and offering them condolences?", again, "Well, none, that's not expected of a supervisor." "How many of your employees have had frostbite of their feet because you couldn't offer them heat in the dead of winter, while out on an exercise?" "We don't do that" "Have you ever watched helicopters and ambulances hauling 186 of your company's employees to the hospital because of one person's chose to err on the side of caution and ended up missing a 30 minute window of safe operation because he was afraid to make a timely decision?" again, "no" And I could go on. Unless you can answer yes to at least one of those questions, you may have a remote inkling, but you really don't know what is to be in that position. I didn't, not until it happened to me. I, like you, thought I did, but I really didn't until I had to.

I must close my portion of this discussion with a comment my wife has made after having read this thread. "Are we trying to teach the pig to sing? All you are doing is frustrating yourself and annoying the pig."

God bless the US Army, the United States and her People. Adieu.

[damianip]

Originally posted by Mergs:
<STRONG>I must close my portion of this discussion with a comment my wife has made after having read this thread. "Are we trying to teach the pig to sing? All you are doing is frustrating yourself and annoying the pig."

God bless the US Army, the United States and her People. Adieu.</STRONG>

That's ironic: a former "grunt" referring the people he promised to protect "pigs".

Mergs, if you're bitter because you were not appreciated for the service you rendered your country and citizens, I feel bad.

However, you knew that when you signed on, didn't you? It's too late now. Some people will appreciate the service you have given us(I do and I'm sure many do), some will not even think about it (sadly, probably the majority) and some, unfortunately, will hold you in contempt as an instrument of war (hopefully the minority). However, feeling superior because you chose this life for yourself is a mistake.

Never forget that you and the Armed Forces serve the American people. They are not the meek sheep you imply them to be.


Paolo

[Jeeves]

If I followed ABC's Peter Jenninings story about and hour ago correctly, it was the passengers, (regular citizens) who took on the hijackers of the flight that crashed in Penn. These unarmed citizens were in cell phone communication with the ground and became aware of the ultimate plan. What incredible heroes these people are. To have made the decision the retake the plane, if that is indeed what they attempted to do, is a supreme act of american heroism. It may be the reason that plane did not make it back to the D. C. area. This was ABC news
reporting that senario as confirmed by several sources tonight. As Neevel stated early on in this thread, "That is what tojo and CO believed" . These hijackers believed the passengers would sit down and die as instructed. Americans don't often do what we are told.
My prayers are with the families of the plane crash victims and the families of those who lost loved ones in D. C. and N. Y.
Ben S. I hope if you are watching this thread from a NYU computer site that you have called your dad back here in WI. I tried to contact him at his office today about you, with no return call. But then you can never get a doc when you need one.


I hope you are ok

[Swordsman]

Colonel Mergens, I'd salute you if I could. I must agree with you completely here. My father is a Lt. Col. in the Air Force, and will probably stay for full Colonel. I want more than anything to attend the Air Force Academy. If I don't make that, I'll get in anyway, and try for a commission and a seat in pilot training.

Normally I try to get along with people here. But you know what? You're all pissing me off. No, you CAN'T know what it's like to go off and risk your life, or send others to do the same, unless you have. So don't try to say you can. My father was commander of a refueler squadron. The men he sent off to hostile areas, he had to send off unarmed. Flying bombs, a perfect, easy target for anybody with the chance. And because he was sending people to go do that, he did it himself. He was also in Desert Storm.

I agree with your point about this last generation or two lacking the experience of a war. What happened yesterday was worse than anything that's ever happened to us. Even the burning of Washington in 1812 didn't inflict this many casualties. We need to turn Afghanistan into a parking lot. Reason? Deterrence. They do harbor terrorists. If other nations see that harboring terrorists gets THEM punished, they're going to hesitate to do so. If terrorists start running out of places to go, that's a MAJOR strike at terrorism in general. And that's the new warfare, the new enemy.

As for the analogy with the family murdered: This is what it really is. You come home, you're family's dead. The guy is gone, and you don't know who it was, but you do know that your neighbors hate you and your family, and have been renting a room to a guy who DID want to kill your family. If you go shoot up your neighbor's house, yeah, you might hit their kid. But they WERE housing this murderer, and they knew it. Not only that, but you probably got the murderer, too. And now, your other neighbors, even if they don't like you, don't want to rent out rooms to other murderers. Because you've got the biggest damn shotgun in the neighborhood.


Now, the sad truth, which will sound very cold. Nations rot while at peace. Look at all of you. You're barely American, not willing to do what needs to be done when probably 60,000 or more of your fellow Americans are dead and buried in rubble. After Pearl Harbor, we bombed downtown Tokyo, then went to war, then dropped an atom bomb on them. Now, even more people are dead, in our capital and largest city, and we don't even want airstrikes. It takes a war, or something like this, to get rid of that kind of thinking. That is what makes nations grow soft, and crumble. And the world can't afford to have America crumble. So, there's the cold, brutal, honest truth: We needed this, and had it a long way in coming. I'm not saying I'm glad for it, or that I'm not shaking with rage wishing I could kill somebody responsible, or sad about all the people killed. I'm saying, from a purely detached, analytical, historical point of view, that war is what strenghtens nations, unites the people behind their flag, and creates heroes. Those three things are necessary for an orderly world. Look what happened when Rome fell. They would have fallen a lot sooner if they were this soft. We can't afford to be.

Now. Go ahead and rip me apart.


P.S. Colonel: What is "MI/AC, USAR"? I am most curious.

[Inquartata]

Originally posted by edew:
<STRONG>I have never seen the need for retribution. Whether it's my family, my friends, or myself (well, in that case, the point is moot) who are counted as fatalities. Life goes on. Certainly we should determine who the perpetrators are, to prevent any recurrence. But what has happened has happened. It's sunk cost as far as I care to realize it. Move on to the future, with a look back to see how to prevent recurrence.</STRONG>

Sunk cost? That's a very cool, dispassionate way to phrase it. Hey, it's just like losing at the tables in Vegas, let's shrug our shoulders and vow not to bet so much next time! Cost-benefit accounting with innocent lives. Peachy...

Me, I have no problem whatsoever with Vengeance, capital V, I'll say it again, without euphemizing: vengeance. You make them pay a high enough price for their viciousness and maybe they'll crawl back under their respective rocks.

Frankly, I don't even care "who the perpetrators are". There's a nice long list of these monsters who've been indisputably tied to murders of univolved civilian men, women and children. If we happen to whack the wrong monster, too bad, and the world's still better off for it. If we get them all, so much the better.

I stop short of attacking innocents, because that's what they do. ( If they'd stolen or hijacked cargo or military planes and hit the Pentagon and military bases, I'd shake my fist a little, maybe, but, well, that's war. These creatures like to consider themselves soldiers, and that's what soldiers do: fight enemy soldiers. They don't slaughter unarmed, anonymous civilians and brag about winning a great victory. ) But I have no qualms with sending the word to the civilians in their vicinity: we're coming, get out of the way, if you insist on harbouring them, feeding them, storing their equipment and munitions, transporting them, helping them out with information, or otherwise abetting them, you're fair game. And if you're a government thumbing your nose at a legitimate, evidence-supported indictment of a criminal, and giving him sanctuary, hold onto your capitols, fellows.

<STRONG>
Missile shield? It won't work against the missiles they're supposed to protect us from.</STRONG>

What's that line from "Monty Python and the Holy Grail"? "I built it [Castle Anthrax] anyway. It sank into the swamp. So I built it again. It sank into the swamp. I built it again. It burned down then sank into the swamp. But the fourth one stayed up. And that's what you'll get when I'm gone: the strongest castle in the land."

True, missile defense doesn't work. Neither is there a cure for cancer, so we'd best give up. The Technology will never improve, we'll never advance to where we can get it right, so why waste resources?

<STRONG>and it certainly won't work against continued terrorist attacks.</STRONG>


By this logic, we might as well dissolve our Navy and Air Force, as they were no protection, either...

<STRONG>The US society and economy runs like a (sort of) fine-tuned engine. Throw a wrench in it and the whole thing grinds to a halt.</STRONG>

Last time I looked most of the country was unaffected by the attack. Not a sign of dysfunction anywhere in my region. Not even price gouging on gasoline.The most damaging thing in the long run will probably turn out to be the grounding of all civilian air traffic---and that's self-inflicted.

<STRONG>
While many are quick to point at Osama bin Laden and is group, we (the US Gov't) must keep an open mind and view to make sure that we don't mistaken the perpetrators, thus aggravating the situation more as well as letting the guilty go free.</STRONG>

As long as they're proven terrorists, I say kill them all and let whatever god they worship sort them out. Then no "guilty go free", and none are left to "aggravate the situation".

<STRONG>
What I don't want to see is some railroading of some presumed guilty parties, only to realize years or decades later that it was some other group.</STRONG>

Agreed, to the extent that those being eyed as the culprits are truly innocent. If they're just blameless of this incident, but clearly tied to the bombing of the Cole or the Khobar Towers or what have you, I shrug my shoulders and lift my palms: justice is still served, and deterrence as well, perhaps.

<STRONG>
Who else could it be? Maybe rogue drug cartel groups, trying to destroy evidence contained in the WTC (and throwing off the scent with the cursory blast of the Pentagon)?</STRONG>

A bit far-fetched, wouldn't you say? What, did they hire Egyptians and Saudis and convince them to martyr themselves for drug lords? You do know they were of Middle Eastern coinage, to a man, right?

<STRONG>But, consider the ramifications of what might occur if we had pursued Osama for the Oklahoma incident. Imagine the red-face plus continual "retributions" the US will receive had we exacted revenge for the Oklahoma incident on the wrong parties.</STRONG>

Hmm. And if we had, how many lives would we have saved?

Nor was it the intelligence community telling us it was "90%-plus certain that it was Osama's group" after Oklahoma City.


<STRONG>
If so, that's because I know that returned aggression will never solve problems. </STRONG>

Very Gandhi-like, and very PC, but untrue. Ask the Jordanians how much trouble they had with the Palestinians after September 1970. Ask the Soviets how many of their people were kidnapped in Beirut in the heydey of the warlords' ransom industry. ( Answer: one. After they got word to the leader of the group holding their man that he should look in the trunk of a parked car on a certain street, where he found his uninvolved brother, quite dead, with his genitals stuffed into his mouth, none. )

<STRONG>
If they were Middle-east fanatics, or a home-bred nut-case, we must ask ourselves why us? Why did they did this? If there is a reason for their hatred of us, then we must address that. </STRONG>

Lots of reasons, some complex, some simple, like "We support Israel" and "We use lots of oil" and "We're not fundamentalist Muslims, therefore we're oppressing fundamentalist Muslims". And we're a big, fat, soft, complacent target, unlike most alternative targets. Address it, sure. Capitulate, no.

[ 09-13-2001: Message edited by: Inquartata ]

[Fencing Angel]

i aggree with swordsman totaly.. i think that we should level Afganastan (spelling) when, and if possible... start cracking down on the terries.. we need to do something so help Stop/prevent this from happening again..... think about it.. they found the EXACT spot where to hit on the world trade center to make it colaspe.... whats from stoping them from doing it again to the sears tower?? or someother place.
and the attack on the pentagon was also planed very well.. if we bomb afganastan and take out 50-100 innacants to get this crime lord i think that the cost of lives will be well worth it. he planed and exacutied this plan killing up to 60,000 people and whats to keep from saying that he won't do it again???

i think that we need do seriously consider wipeing this louse from the face of the earth... and all of his kind.

Just my two cents

[ 09-13-2001: Message edited by: Fencing Angel ]