Quote:
Originally posted by Dragonlich
People assume that the goal of 9/11 was to kill as many people as possible. That may have been part of the goal, but the main goal probably was exposure. What better way to show that you're the coolest uber-terrorist than destroying THE symbol of American corporate power in THE city everyone knows. Oh, and to be even more Uber, you destroy the military command centre and the political leadership too (or at least attempt to do that).
You seem to say that terrorist have regard for humanity *because* they choose not to kill as many as possible. I'd say that's just wishful thinking. While killing people may not be their main goal, the fact that they have no problem with killing people at all makes them inhuman and evil. It's not like they'd be less evil if they kill "only" 3,000 people instead of 10,000. Using that logic, Saddam wouldn't have been evil, because there were still Iraqis left alive; the same goes for Hitler - there were Jews left alive, there were still Russians left, etc.
|
I honestly think they don't care whether people were in those towers or not because you're right, it was meant as a symbol to get exposure.
Quote:
Originally posted by powerclown
OK, lets take the Liberal Left's scenario and say that this is all about oil, that we invaded to get ahold of their oil reserves. I have no problem with that. All Hussein did with it was buy weapons and build palaces for himself while his people suffered in abject poverty and his country's infrastructure was neglected and in ruin. In the meantime, the rest of the civlized world need what god so problematically placed underneath this group of medieval, backward, tyrannically governed, intellectuallly stunted and ridiculously unorganized human beings. (The Middle East)
|
I hope you don't mean this or you mean a certain specific group of terrorists because I'd be pretty damn offended to be called a backward and intellectually stuned human being.
No, I wouldn't be offended - i'd be fucking pissed off and say back at ya for saying that. (And indeed, in that way, things would apply too)
It doesn't help your argument to label people.
And I don't put things in good or evil view nor do i quanitfy things as good or evil either (as Dragonlich pointed out with kiling 3000 vs. 10,000).
Why? Because unless you're a psycho out to kill people for fun and pleasure, you probably have a reason be it symbolic or not.
If your reason is wrong or right, I can say from my own view. But it doesn't make a person evil or good. I don't paint people that way. I only agree or disagree. Because in the end of all things, it doesn't tell you if you are right. It only tells you who is left and is remaining.
And yes it is largely a part of my own nature growing up. I don't like to blame things on being good or bad or whatever. I like to find things practical and the reasons behind them (Well i guess being an engineer is a big factor). So that would be a big reason why.