Did anyone but me not care when 9/11 happened?

Post Reply New Topic

Maybe not even then. Hitler declared war on the US, not the other way around. If he had not, would America merely have concentrated on the Pacific theatre? Plenty of Americans certainly wanted to...

It was the attack upon Pearl Harbor which got us Americans out of our complacency though. If it were just U-boats sinking cargo vessels, we would have just stopped sending cargo ships. If it weren't for the effect of Pearl Harbor pissing us off, then we probably would have just continued the isolationism until either Tokyo or Berlin became the capital of the world. As it is, the Japanese picked the wrong people to tick off at the wrong time.

Americans are at the best when in a rotten mood.

It goes all the way back to the Civil War. When Lincoln, Grant and Sherman got tired of Confederate arrogance and upittyness Sherman went in a ruined the state of Georgia. Then he did twice as bad on the State of South Carolina where the secesh began.

The Army did a number of the Indians at wounded knee. A small payback for the Little Big Horn.

Then of course, we nuked Japan as just and condign revenge for the attack on Pearl Harbor.

We are beautiful when we are righteously angry.

ruveyn

I can't say I didn't care, but I didn't get worked up over it.

For me, it was a fascinating event because I knew something of that magnitude WAS GOING TO happen. I'd been paying attention to people who are paid big bucks to address Congress on threats to national security, and that we had not seen a "9/11-type" event until 9/11 was largely good fortune and not because of how great our security measures were.

My first thought when I heard about it was, "It finally happened."

Oh yes, those indians bastards, defending their way of life disrupted since colonization.

Last edited by greenblue on 11 Sep 2010, 5:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I cared at the time, and I still do. I'm just not blinded by the emotion. I think a big part of it was simply the scope and uniqueness of the attack that makes it stand out so much. My problem, at least from other people's point of view, is that I look at the numbers and not the method. I know this is going to sound horrible, but 3000 people isn't that many compared to how many have died as a result of our War on Terror. I think how ~1,800 people die a year from food poisoning, ~23k die each year from the flu, ~42k from car accidents, etc... Then when you look at the response in terms of lives and money, it just doesn't make any sense to me.

If the end goal is to protect/save American lives period, it seems there is much more efficient ways to go about doing it. We will spend billions on a threat that in terms of tangibly threatening American lives is rather minor. Don't get me wrong, I certainly understand the potential implication, both economic and in lives, if certain terror activities were allowed to go unchecked. I guess I just don't understand how saving a person from cancer, crime, accidents, etc... is any less worthy than saving lives from a potential terror attack.


Adam

Death is a natural part of life, don't cry about spilled milk.

Anyone who claims not to be afraid of dying is either mentally deranged or lying. Fear of death is a very basic instinct that keeps living things alive.

Are you kidding me? Everything that lives must die it doesn't matter whether you want to survive or not. Surviving isn't enough, it never was.

This is about 9/11, I hardly see that anyone here would regard that as just "a natural part of life".

It's not a matter of whether it's "natural" or not. Your emotions are genetically designed to fear and avoid death. That's the mechanics of staying alive. It's perfectly "natural" to get painfully burned if you stick your hand in a fire so you don't. "Natural"is a BS word.

To Greenblue: you are talking about how they were murdered is not natural? History is full of death at the hands of people and it happens every day. In essence death by murder is natural because it repeats itself consistently. There is no avoiding the past, and you can't change how humans are; the cycle of death was started by man but it can't be undone until the end of all things.

To Sand: So you are contradicting yourself by saying natural is "BS", but also saying emotions are genetictically designed for a purpose? Emotions are NATURAL, my poor little friend.

I didn't really care and I still don't. Whatever that makes me.... it makes me. Still....pretty much everyone remembers where they were and what they were doing when the 911 attacks occured.

I was sleeping in that day and my ex-girlfriend woke me up at 9:30 telling me that the twin towers had been hit by jet airliners. I watched it all on CNN for a minutes, shrugged my shoulders and said "it was Osama Bin Laden" and then went back to sleep.


These sort of things just don't concern me unless I or someone I care about is directly involved. It's just not part of my microcosm and didn't affect me in anyway.

Unless you adhere towards Fatalism then that would be the case from that belief, however, in society, murder is not consider a natural aspect of life, but rather an undesirable human intervention of a natural process..

Not only that, but by stating "it is just a natural part of life" in the way you portrayed it tends to be looked as a desensitive way of looking at a tragedy, specially for those whose family members were victims. If the issue is as you claim that it is "natural" nevertheless, I don't see why bringing up the issue in this discussion in the first place, as no one seemed to be arguing or debating wether this is a natural or unnatural event but the pain resulting from it, so your position is pointless.

Agree. Many times the number of WTC victims die every day of starvation. It didn't phase me at all.

ruevyn.....i'm pretty sure i'm not the first one who has noticed this, but i'd say your "first person experience" was rather limited if you're actually 74 now. If so....you were five years old when the pearl harbor attack occured. So either you are significantly older than 74 or you're grossly exaggerating your "first person experience" of the event. Unless you were in the immediate area of the attacks as a five-year old, i'd say your grandiose claims here are just that.