Tommorrow marks the 2 year anniversary of 9/11/01

Wow! Doesn't seem possible.

God Bless USA.

lets hope there wont come new attacks

http://www2.postcards.org/go2/candles?3003761

"Please light a candle... in memory of the fallen... in the name of peace."

I watched it live with an american airlines 777 captain.He was VERY upset. I wasnt sure it was even real at the time,I thought(or kept hoping)it was like one of those fake nuclear war broadcast type films.
[Message Edited]

God bless America and all those who perrish on that tragic day.

Terrorists just don't understand. The world will not bow to terrorism, especially Americans. We are too proud and strong a nation. "Bin Laden", we will never give up looking for you!!!! May justice be swift.

hmmmm.

has anyone actually realized, that since the US try to fight terrorism, there have been more attacks all over the world than before??

still i'm proud to be an american

I think it would be best to leave the politics out of this thread and save it for the political thread. Lets just post our messages of hope for a better futere here.

I will never forget 9/11.

There have been more terrorist attacks since 9/11? Huh? Where?

I suspect it's more a case that people were't paying attention before.

Number of significant terrorist attacks on the US or US interests since 9/11: 0.

 

Brad....a little place called Bali....

Oh...that's right....only mainly Aussies that time so it doesn't count....

Hmm well maybe nothing significant here but still the nuts are going strong over there on that part of the globe according to my nephew who is sitting in the center of it all, he tells me they are blowing up his buddies left and right only a few feet away from him...

and since some of our loved ones are still apparently fighting over the so called "terriorism" significant stuff is still going on.

has anyone actually realized, that since the US try to fight terrorism, there have been more attacks all over the world than before??

One major attack, an attack in Bali -- after Indonesia had been warned mind you is a far cry from "more attacks all over the world".

[Message Edited]

Doreen - the # of Americans killed in Iraq is only a tiny fraction of the # of Americans who died on 9/11. Let's keep things in perspective.

More American soldiers died on average per day in World War II than in the entire Iraq conflict. The effectiveness of the US military and the concrete results of the war on terror are pretty hard to argue against.

No further attacks here in the US and no attacks on American interests overseas. There was an attack in Bali but one could argue that the Indonesian government, having ignored specific warnings from the US about the terrorist problem there, shares some responsibility there.

I run stats all day long, and to be honest w/ you I don't like them and they mean nothing to me regarding perspective cuz if it's 1 in 100 or 1 in 1000 if that 1 is someone you love or care about "that" is the only thing that makes things more real and important to "me" doing stats will never quite make me that insensitive on how I look or precieve looking at things around me Brad.
(maybe cuz you're a guy and I'm just a girl?)

at any rate terriorism is here to stay until the earth stops spinning, nothing will change that and Stats are decieving sometimes... (cuz they don't show the whole picture) hehe

#10 by Scribe Frogboy - 9/11/2003 7:23:54 AM There have been more terrorist attacks since 9/11? Huh? Where?I suspect it's more a case that people were't paying attention before.

Frogboy beat me to it.

I'm sorry, but to be blunt, Americans are blatantly ignorant and stupid of what goes on in the rest of the world. They don't realize the crap people go through every day all around the world until it happens to THEM. Then they act as if this is a new and horrific thing.

very true cuz when it happens to "you" it "feels" different huh? hehe

Of course it's a bigger deal when something happensn up close or to someone you "Care" about.

Fortunately, in a representative democracy we elect people who are supposed to see the big picture.  Hence, they are paid to recognize that while terrorism is "here to stay" that the level of terrorism need not be high.

well "they" are doing a sucky job and since "they" are only humans and so are the terriorist odds are high this will happen again, (hopefully not today though cuz I got alot work)

Brad it's "nice" to think we humans are actually accomplishing things around here on earth but we're not...

and it's "nice" to look at numbers and stats to think we see things that we think are so great on our own doing but in the "Big picture" we're not... hehe

The Pledge of Alligence October 12, 1892

I pledge allegiance to my flag and to the republic for which it stands: one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

This is what they sought to destory...

The gov. is doing a fine job destroying personal liberties on its own.

Terrorists just want to do what their name implies, inflict terror.

FB: There's not much basis for an equitable comparison between WWII and what has happened in Iraq re: effectiveness of the US military and the casualty rate. (One could argue the latter is instead simply a reflection of the disorganized, ineffective and relatively limited resistance put up by the opponent against superior forces.)

Germany and Japan were well armed, had navies and air forces in addition to ground troops and put up far greater and sustained resistance in a global theater for almost 4 years (the term of US involvement). Not surprising the US casualty rate was higher. One could probably say that of the US Civil War also, even just picking one side for comparison. The Battle of Antietam just in one day resulted in over 26,000 casualties, about 14K Confederate to approx 12K Union.

In contrast to the opponents in WW II, a good portion of Iraq's air force (what was left of it from 1991) was found buried in the sand and reportedly the Iraqi air force never even left the ground much less engaged in combat. The Iraqi army, again much the worse for wear after 1991, put up relatively desultory resistance compared to the combatants of WWII. It distinguished itself primarily in retreat and abandonment. There was no naval warfare to speak of and no Iraqi wolf packs prowled the Persian Gulf. Of course Iraq put up more of a fight than Panama or Grenada (where I believe it was determined that the majority of all US casualties were the result of friendly fire), but comparisons to the conflict in WW II are simply not apt as a equivalent gauge of military effectiveness against a very different opponent in considerably different circumstances.

As now often noted, since the cessation of "major hostilities" in Iraq the casualties have exceeded those incurred during the time of "major hostilities." Does that statistic reflect the ineffectiveness of the US military against an armed and motivated insurgency? Not necessarily since the situation isn't quite that simple, although I suppose someone could make that case. One can use stats for all sorts of purposes and often they can obscure more than they reveal.

The recitation of such stats of course give cold comfort and are perhaps even offensive to those who lost loved ones or those wounded in such conflicts, whether combatants or not. And the effectiveness of the US actions in Iraq in bringing democracy and stability to the area and reducing the threat of further terrorist activities remain to be seen.