An Alternative History to 9/11 Options

[Hartmann]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14753927/site/newsweek/

Interesting read. I agree that some of the things should have happened differently but some of the proposed events are just implausible. (quick executions?)

[Seeker]

summary plz

[Billy]

Hindsight is 20/20.

[Hartmann]

summary plz

Things that Bush should have done after 9/11.

Most notably, putting the 10 Mountain Division in Tora Bora as soon as the CIA reported bin Laden there. I am not sure that's a Bush problem... More like a general and colonel problem.

[Hartmann]

Hindsight is 20/20.

Exactly.

[impala454]

I love how news agencies are devoting time to writing fiction. Some people just have no clue how shit works in the real world. The liberal "why don't we all just get along" view is child-like almost. Our planet overall is very peaceful as far as I'm concerned. Think about it, over six billion people living in a world with nuclear weapons. The fact that the earth isn't a smoldering radioactive cinder by now shows at least a shred of peace. Shit we can barely agree on anything between the 30 or so people on this board. Imagine if those of us on this board were all put in a room with loaded guns.

[pebkac]

I love how news agencies are devoting time to writing fiction. Some people just have no clue how shit works in the real world. The liberal "why don't we all just get along" view is child-like almost. Our planet overall is very peaceful as far as I'm concerned. Think about it, over six billion people living in a world with nuclear weapons. The fact that the earth isn't a smoldering radioactive cinder by now shows at least a shred of peace. Shit we can barely agree on anything between the 30 or so people on this board. Imagine if those of us on this board were all put in a room with loaded guns.

Yes. You've got liberalism figured out. Liberals want nothing other than to make sure that every man, woman, and child on this planet has access to nuclear and/or biological weapons if they so choose. It's every human being's right.

[Mommy]

I love how news agencies are devoting time to writing fiction. Some people just have no clue how shit works in the real world. The liberal "why don't we all just get along" view is child-like almost. Our planet overall is very peaceful as far as I'm concerned. Think about it, over six billion people living in a world with nuclear weapons. The fact that the earth isn't a smoldering radioactive cinder by now shows at least a shred of peace. Shit we can barely agree on anything between the 30 or so people on this board. Imagine if those of us on this board were all put in a room with loaded guns.

I disagree. Look at the Middle East. There is so much unrest over there and I feel that its only a matter of time until that unrest spreads. I mean, the US is already involved over there.

I dont know if you meant that (1)right now overall our planet is peaceful, but that at times it isnt..or (2) that thus far our planet has been pretty peaceful and the future has yet to unfold.

Let me explain each scenario:
(1) At this point in time there are no wars encompassing most of the major nations of the world so our planet is relatively peaceful at the moment. In the past, however, there have been times when our planet could be considered unpeaceful: World War 1 and 2 (just to name an example). Whether or not the world is overall peaceful changes at times. It fluctuates from time to time.


(2) I am in no way ridiculing Christians, but this is commonly a Christian belief: that the world is progressively getting worse. Right now, the world is still relatively peaceful but in the future it will not be like that. There will be mass wars which involve the use of nuclear weapons etc. Basically, this is an "end of days" type view. The world is progressively getting worse and worse but has yet to be a mostly bad world.

If you mean that our world is relatively peaceful right now today like in scenario (1), then I actually might agree with you because I feel that there have been a lot worse times in history. Nuclear warfare is a fairly new technology. The reason we havent seen much of it in past wars is because it didnt exist. Had nuclear weapons been readily accessible during the world wars, things could have ended a lot worse than they did. Yes, we used the atomic bomb twice, but "luckily" we were one of the first ones to trully test that technology. I dont know if Im really making any sense, but Im just trying to say that we havent really blown a chunk out of the side of the planet yet because nuclear weapons havent been around that long. Thank God for that and I seriously mean that. I dont think any of us would be here today if that technology was centuries old. So its not really that our world is perse peaceful, but rather it is just new to the technology that could kill millions in a shorter amount of time. It took Hitler how many years to kill 11 million people? With technology advances, you could cut that time down to a couple of days.

[Seeker]

I disagree. Look at the Middle East. There is so much unrest over there and I feel that its only a matter of time until that unrest spreads. I mean, the US is already involved over there.

I dont know if you meant that (1)right now overall our planet is peaceful, but that at times it isnt..or (2) that thus far our planet has been pretty peaceful and the future has yet to unfold.

Let me explain each scenario:
(1) At this point in time there are no wars encompassing most of the major nations of the world so our planet is relatively peaceful at the moment. In the past, however, there have been times when our planet could be considered unpeaceful: World War 1 and 2 (just to name an example). Whether or not the world is overall peaceful changes at times. It fluctuates from time to time.


(2) I am in no way ridiculing Christians, but this is commonly a Christian belief: that the world is progressively getting worse. Right now, the world is still relatively peaceful but in the future it will not be like that. There will be mass wars which involve the use of nuclear weapons etc. Basically, this is an "end of days" type view. The world is progressively getting worse and worse but has yet to be a mostly bad world.

If you mean that our world is relatively peaceful right now today like in scenario (1), then I actually might agree with you because I feel that there have been a lot worse times in history. Nuclear warfare is a fairly new technology. The reason we havent seen much of it in past wars is because it didnt exist. Had nuclear weapons been readily accessible during the world wars, things could have ended a lot worse than they did. Yes, we used the atomic bomb twice, but "luckily" we were one of the first ones to trully test that technology. I dont know if Im really making any sense, but Im just trying to say that we havent really blown a chunk out of the side of the planet yet because nuclear weapons havent been around that long. Thank God for that and I seriously mean that. I dont think any of us would be here today if that technology was centuries old. So its not really that our world is perse peaceful, but rather it is just new to the technology that could kill millions in a shorter amount of time. It took Hitler how many years to kill 11 million people? With technology advances, you could cut that time down to a couple of days.

[Seeker]

I love how news agencies are devoting time to writing fiction. Some people just have no clue how shit works in the real world. The liberal "why don't we all just get along" view is child-like almost. Our planet overall is very peaceful as far as I'm concerned. Think about it, over six billion people living in a world with nuclear weapons. The fact that the earth isn't a smoldering radioactive cinder by now shows at least a shred of peace. Shit we can barely agree on anything between the 30 or so people on this board. Imagine if those of us on this board were all put in a room with loaded guns.

MAD - Mutally Assured Destruction

[Mommy]

read the last paragraph

thats the most "important" part of my post

[Spectatrix]

summary plz

http://www.techsans.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=78

1. Stay on topic.

2. No personal attacks. Civility is strictly enforced!

3. There shouldn't be anything NSFW in NPR, unless it pertains to the thread, which in that case it should be linked and be given a warning.

4. Post a credible link to the article/source you are referring.

5. Posting the full text of the article is optional, but if posted please place it in a quote block to distinquish it from your commentary.

6. Don't ask someone else to summarize the article. If you want to know what it says, read it!

This post has been edited by Spectatrix: Sep 18 2006, 11:27 AM

[Jim]

IBTB

[Seeker]

http://www.techsans.net/forums/index.php?showtopic=78

as long as bush doesn't have to follow his own country's laws i don't have to follow my own message board's rules

i'm the decider, like bush

[Jim]

as long as bush doesn't have to follow his own country's laws i don't have to follow my own message board's rules

i'm the decider, like bush

NO!!!!!!!!


Acceptable answer, though.