9/11: It is time to move on

[thir]

Had some trouble with the system, hope this is clear:

Denuseri:
"First off, there is a big difference between being complacent with our security and leaving ourselves open to attack, and being generally prepared and with being paranoid and suspicious of everyone and everything."


True. And IMO we are leaning into the paranoid side, + I suspect that commercial interests are exploiting this paranoia in among other areass security measures in airports and weapons. The last bright idea with everybody being x-rayed in the airports is so totally over the top for several reasons.

D:
"Secondly, Yes, one must be ready and able to retaliate in the event that one's preparedness doesn't present enough of a deterrent to those who would harm one or one's nation. The sharpest sword is of little use if one lacks the will to wield it."

The whole "retaliate" idea is, IMO, such a bit mistake!

1) As I see it, terrorism is a crime and should be treated like one. Meaning you deal with it by police and intelligence, because it is a crime, and because you cannot hit mosquitoes with a broad sword.

2) By making it a 'war', you upgrade your opponents to soldiers, not criminals, and legally they should then be under the Geneva convention. Which makes the Guatamamo base a matter of lawlessness and war crimes. (The base is a whole topic in itself.)

3) By attacking a whole country, you clear the ground for countless new terrorists.

4) The retaliation idea should have gone out with the dinosaurs - the world is too small and world peace too fragile for that kind of thinking.

5) It is not my intention to hurt anybody's feelings with these opinions.

D:
"Third, it goes without saying that the cause and possible effects must be delved into and discussed at length...and should have been prior to taking action as well as during and after,
"

Prior, yes!
And both my countries (UK and DK) were equally stupid and non-thinking!

D:
" hindsight of course always provides better insight than that which is available at the time during any incident but is still a necessity if one doesn't wish to repeat past mistakes. Only ten years have elapsed, IMHO we are only now just finding out the consequences of actions taken on that day."
"

I do not think you can say 'hindsight' when you start two wars. You have to think first and shoot afterwards - and again, that goes for all the countries who did not. Likwise, many people have had serious opinions on the whole thing for all 10 years. It is just that no one have been listening under Bush.
Or Blair. Or Fogh.

D:
"Fourth, the war's intent as I understand it was that it should never be conducted in any manner that at all suggests that its being waged against someone else s religious beliefs so much as to bring to justice those responsible for perpetrating terrorism against us"


Well, that war certainly meant a lot of grief for a lot of muslims - totally innocent people. Harrasment everywhere. Also harrasment of peole who oppose the war.

I wonder how many have died by now, how many civilians and innocent bystanders - one article said about 30.000.

You cannot wage a war and assume that you only hit the criminals, that is obvious.

D:
"and prevent future acts of such aggression against us and or our allies. "

As for that, the threat of terrorism is said to be mulitiplied now compared to before the war.


D:
"It's my opinion that it's the media, (who thrives on any kind of opposition)"

Sadly you have a very big point here! Though thankfully not all the media are that bad.

D:
"and the ignorant (who act as drones for the manipulative hateful few with the means and an agenda) who wish to make it a war between cultures and religions."

The scary thing is that it does not seem to be specially ignorant people who fall for the terrorist progaganda. It is all sorts of people: university students, normal workers, professional women with children...All the more reason to start looking into WHY these things happen. It is, IMO, too easy to simply say that they are religious fanatics - though the core of them must be, they are, after what is said, a minority.

I agree 100%, in that we should be learning from it all.

But are we? Who are looking into it - who are researching the phenomena of terrorism?

Too many interests in calling everyone you do not like 'terrorist', too many political and commercial interests here, too much muddling of the waters and keeping the pot boiling.

What is needed is unbiased (if such a thing is possible) research and political thinking.