Thread: Was The Pentagon 9/11 Attack Justified?

Originally Posted by surasak

Originally Posted by KID

japan drew first blood and killed many innocents of all nationalities--- they got what they had coming to them !!!!

So, in other words, Iraqis have the right now to attack and kill Americans in the U.S. using any means possible.

Great thinking.

Didn't this all start because IRAQ ATTACKED KUWAIT?????

I wasn't aware that Kuwait was one of the United States.

The things you learn around here.

yep then poor innocent soldiers under Saddam were forced to invade the war mongering Kuwait citizens bring down on them the wrath of the godless infidels of the u.n-- sponsored by SAUDI ARABIA

Originally Posted by KID

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by KID

he was meaning-- JAR HEADS-- U.S. MARINES-- THE SIMPER FIDELIS

Well, John Wayne was a Marine.
Meaning some disrespect to John Wayne?

your wrong !!!! never a marine-- nevber in wwII

Dosen't matter - he played enough Marines to qualify!

he stuck to what he did best-- acting

tried to join the navy but was refused entry due to health issues

Originally Posted by KID

yep then poor innocent soldiers under Saddam were forced to invade the war mongering Kuwait citizens bring down on them the wrath of the godless infidels of the u.n-- sponsored by SAUDI ARABIA

Again, what does this have to do with the U.S.?

Kuwait is not U.S. territory and Iraq never attacked the United States.

So, when Iraqi extremist start attacking Americans in the U.S. will it be justified (using the logic you have put forth several times in this thread...that retaliation is acceptable. even if the consequences are severe, if one attacks another first)?

Would a future Iraqi extremist government now be justified in launching a nuclear attack on a U.S. city since we attacked first? How about Iran (if we foolishly attack Iran first)?

Originally Posted by surasak

Originally Posted by KID

yep then poor innocent soldiers under Saddam were forced to invade the war mongering Kuwait citizens bring down on them the wrath of the godless infidels of the u.n-- sponsored by SAUDI ARABIA

Again, what does this have to do with the U.S.?

Have you forgotten that big SUV you're driving needs lots of gas?
Or, perhaps it's one of those stylish Toyota Priuses?
Whatever - even the bus you take to work needs that oil...

KID: The Japanese attacked first, thus, the U.S. was justified in the atomic bombing.

Surasak: The Americans attacked Iraq first, thus, Iraq (and maybe Iran) would be justified in atom bombing the U.S. (following KID's logic, of course).

Be careful what you wish for, KID.

Originally Posted by Boon Mee

Originally Posted by surasak

Originally Posted by KID

yep then poor innocent soldiers under Saddam were forced to invade the war mongering Kuwait citizens bring down on them the wrath of the godless infidels of the u.n-- sponsored by SAUDI ARABIA

Again, what does this have to do with the U.S.?

Have you forgotten that big SUV you're driving needs lots of gas?
Or, perhaps it's one of those stylish Toyota Priuses?
Whatever - even the bus you take to work needs that oil...

And when the oil fields run dry, then.........? Will all the conflict and nastiness have been in vain?

Originally Posted by surasak

Originally Posted by RDN

Originally Posted by surasak

...Here's a number for you: less than 2,000 American civilians died in the entire time of World War II....

And here's a number for you: 11,200 US civilian deaths.

World War II casualties - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You didn't read the link, did you?

Yes I did. Maybe your definition of civilian is different from mine. But dead means dead.

So how does Wikipedia's 11,200 civilian deaths become Surasak's <2,000?

The Wiki number includes U.S. Merchant Marine casualties of around 9,000.

In time of war, the merchant marine is an auxiliary to the Navy, and can be called upon to deliver troops and supplies for the military.

United States Merchant Marine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

All casualty figures in WW2 pale against those of the Soviet Union.
More German soldiers lost their life in Russia than all other theatres of the war (including Germany) combined.
More Russians lost their life than all fatalities of all other warring countries combined.

And when the oil fields run dry, then.........? Will all the conflict and nastiness have been in vain?[/quote]
Again...those fields are not ging to run dry in your's, your kids or their great, great grand kids lifetimes.
besides, they are finding more fields all the time.

taken from another topic:

The world is using 4.3 billion barrels a year. Present proved reserves of the top ten countries are approx. 1092 billion barrels. Proved reserves means presently profitable to retrieve and refine. The USA has 500 billion to 1.1 trillion in oil shale unconventional reserves alone. There are proabably trillions of barrels farther out in the oceans. The oil companies presently look for deposits as close to the marketplace as possible. The proved oil reserves of the Middle East shifts to a higher and higher number as the value of oil increases. The oil is there. It's a matter of at what price does it become profitable to pull out of the ground and refine.

Originally Posted by attaboy

taken from another topic:

The world is using 4.3 billion barrels a year.

Bzzt. Try more like 30+ billion per year and increasing.

What is the ratio between economically viable oil and that which is not (at current market prices)?

Originally Posted by surasak

The Wiki number includes U.S. Merchant Marine casualties of around 9,000.

In time of war, the merchant marine is an auxiliary to the Navy, and can be called upon to deliver troops and supplies for the military.

United States Merchant Marine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

D@mn, I read only the first paragraph.

Originally Posted by mad_dog

Kid I have read and reread that statement several times and it makes no sense at all. Go play in the sand.

Really!!! Are you trying to say Alqueda doesn't exist??
Or that terrorists don't exist???
I just love the 2 brain celled Micheal Moorisms!

Or maybe you just need to take your head out of the sand!

justified? i'm not sure what you mean, but the pentagon was certainly a legitimate target.

the WTC is less clear, but i'm sure from their perspective it was fair game.

The CIA, NSA, FBI, Customs, and other Federal agencies had large offices there.

Originally Posted by raycarey

justified? i'm not sure what you mean, but the pentagon was certainly a legitimate target.

I too, believe, that the Pentagon was a legitimate target.

^
For a missile

Hardly. The damage is not consistent with that of a cruise missile.

Originally Posted by surasak

Hardly. The damage is not consistent with that of a cruise missile.

Wake up , it was a bomb or a missile , did you see any photos showing a jet or its debris in the area?

I didn't see any photos or videos of a missle either.

Do you know how much a jet airliner weighs? Hint: it's mostly air. A fully loaded 757-23 weighs 225,000 pounds.

What else weighs 225,000 pounds?

This: Type GK1C-B Diesel Locomotive

How big of a hole do you think it would make in the outer wall of the Pentagon?