i think we as americans have learned alot about ourselves. we are perfectly willing to compromise our values and everything this country stands for by supporting torture and indefinite detention. we are so cowardly that we accept a bunch of glorified mall security guards sticking their hands down our childrens pants and groping our grandmothers breasts all in the name of feeling safe.
We shouldn't have been meddling when the Soviets were in Afghanistan, and we should have drawn down our military presence in the holy land a decade ago. Isn't that why they attacked us in the first place? I'm sure the Europeans are wondering the same thing.
1. Why? It's not like the Afghans were saying no to us. Oh, first it's turning the other cheek, and then it's acceding to their demands now? The Saudi government doesn't mind our presence. Hell, I sincerely doubt the Saudi citizenry is that concerned about US forces in Saudi Arabia - god knows they have concerns with their government and stuff. A fair point. Though one wonders how much progress Libya really would have made over those seven years, given that a more capable nation in Iran still doesn't have them, and you can't argue then Bush caused the revolution, more like limited potential fallout from the revolution. A good thing, but a different claim, you know. The people of the Middle East are hardly a monolithic bloc overwhelmingly supporting barbarians in the Taliban and Al Qaeda, so I don't really understand that point. I mean, it's not like Al Qaeda could use some Middle Eastern nationalism, as they're not even Arabs in Afghanistan.
How would you expect the Afghans to say no? Thats like justifying rape because the victim didn't say no. In the 90's, we hadn't been attacked. How can you turn the other cheek when nothing has occurred to turn away from? The CIA was warned by oversees officials that attacks were being planned, and they knew that those attacks were because of our foreign policy. Looking back, what seems to be the better alternative: Maintain our bloated oversees presence pushing the nation to the brink of bankruptcy while filling the coffers of the military industrial complex, and gaining the scorn of the world's nations, or quit policing the world and focus on our own defense (9/11 is averted, no wars in Iraq and Afghanistan). I don't see how you can claim that the Saudi's don't care about our presence when every hijacker on 9/11 was from Saudi Arabia and their motives were well documented by respected officials from the CIA.
What did we do in Afghanistan in the 1980s that was so terrible? We gave weapons so that they could fight an aggressor, an aggressor whom we didn't like. Did the Afghan go back to fighting each other once the Soviets left? Sure. But that's just what the Afghan people do. Whether we gave them Stingers or not wouldn't have changed that at all. Once we leave, that's what they'll do. The motives of who? The hijackers? Who cares about some grunts? The important motive is that of the guy running the show, Bin Laden, who wanted nothing less than a total removal of American influence from the Middle East and replacing the Saudi monarchy with a theocracy. That, we will never permit, nor should we. No empire would ever do that. We're not withdrawing from the Middle East, and anyone who thinks we should is completely naive on foreign affairs. We have interests in the Middle East. So we have soldiers there. And it's not maintaining a prescence that has caused financial problems - it has been fighting a needless war in Iraq and a stupid war in Afghanistan. That's the problem. A country of 300 million can afford a couple bases in the desert.
That being the case, the threat of terrorism will loom and civil liberties will continue to be eroded in the name of fighting a war on the bi-product of our own poor foreign policy. Unfortunately, empires don't last.
We've learned that Osama was still the leader and very much in control -- now ALQ is in complete disarray.
I thought we could have been a more united country, but that attack really divided the country even more.
yes he would have thrown a bunch of uranium at the rebels, 10 years later their risk of cancer would be way higher!
That America's military still kicks quite a bit of ass, even when the politicans try to screw things up.
I learned that America isn't as secure and safe as we take for granted, and we should never again assume we are simply safe because we are Americans. At the same time, we should not live in a state of fear or terror as that not only is a crappy way to live, but is dangerous as we may give up our rights as well as take actions against others that are both unnecessary and do more harm than good. I learned that Americans are quick to blame, and slow to truly take the time to understand, and this is probably true universally around the world. That we expect our leaders to be our saviors, and still aren't willing to make the sacrifices in the name our nation, but we are willing to say how great we are and always will be. This is a nation more divided than ever, and I believe history, and by history I mean a 1,000 years for now, will mark 9/11 as one of the most significant events in history. It was the first major event of a millennium, and may be the single most dramatic event in recorded history ever - one that was seen and experienced around the world on live video. It will either mark the decline of a nation - focused on security and delusioned into complacency by a sense of grandeur. Can Americans see our economic problems in the context of a global world, and realize the true causes of our slump is not the actions of Bush or Obama (although they play a role) but the fundamental forces of globalization, education, cheap labor, and a lack of new technology and innovation? I believe we are going to slip to the worlds number 4 economic power eventually, behind China, India, and Brazil. I don't have faith in our leadership - Republicans or Democratic, to do what is necessary. Our political system is split and at odds, and so is the public. It is indeed dark times for this country, and I have learned that an event like 9/11 may bring us together for a little bit, but tear us further apart in the long run.
Yeah...but, Seriously? The one guy who's decision unquestionably mattered? The guy who oversaw an administration that systematically trumped up the case for war while silencing the case against it? The Commander in Chief? How does Bush, of all people, get a pass on this one?
We learned that men can achieve incredibly terrible things when guided by blind faith. None of which were George W Bush.
Why not stop here? I don't think your argument is strong enough to support a sentence of the form, "Anyone who thinks we should x is completely naive on y. I really hope this is satire. A fine example of circular reasoning within circular reasoning (Mobius strip reasoning?), in any case. If you're being serious, I'm afraid the US military inhabits significantly more than "a couple bases in the desert:" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_military_bases (nice map here) http://militarybases.com/ Beyond that, forward deployments are largely responsible for those "needless" and "stupid" wars. You're right that the overseas military presence is about preserving a particular interest (let's put it out in the open and just say what we're talking about: access to oil); but you have nothing to say about how that interest justifies such a presence.
I don't know, I've tried to learn to stop worrying and love the bomb, but something about living in a cave with those who brought doomsday, and their handpicked list of "preferred" survivors plus two incarnations of Peter Sellers, that doesn't sit quite right, no matter what the proposed advantageous gender ratio will be able to do to my precious fluids. Fluoride, anyone?
