Saturday, September 15, 2007

DAILY MAIL UK - 9/11 no Pearl Harbor, it's all an exaggeration, get over it

Bush the Jihadist: How the world was plunged into an apocalyptic war

by CORRELLI BARNETT

the World Trade Centre on September 11, 2001, was nothing like Pearl Harbour on December 7, 1941, when the entire American battle fleet was sunk or crippled by a mass air attack by another great power, Japan.

Deaths at Pearl Harbor: 2117

Deaths on 9/11 (whan at least 200 JUMPED to their deaths): 2996

41.7% more.

Value of the battleships sunk (OK and CA, and AZ, WV): about $250 million in today's dollars

Value of WTC, Pentagon, lost revenue, lost value in airlines...anyone doubt it was in the tens of BILLIONS? Many businesses NEVER returned to NYC or Manhattan. What was the final 'insurance' settlement? The suit over finding the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia responsible (and others) still goes on, doesn't it?

Proximate reason for Pearl Harbor - our economic measures taken over their invasion(s) of China had crippled Japan

Proximate Reason for 9/11 - Our military measures to physically redeem Kuwait left men in the Hijaz

Real Reason for Pearl Harbor - Japanese Empire could never succeed until it was able to encompass the resources of south asia

Real Reason for 9/11 - the Caliphate could never succeed while successful free peoples 'debauched the world' as satan's instruments running about making up their own rules out of their own heads instead of following god as the sovereign. Nation States no longer exist for such movements.

No matter how sensational its impact, 9/11 still remains a terrorist outrage perpetrated by a mere 19 men armed with Stanley knives.

Nor had the attack been masterminded, like Pearl Harbour, by the government of a foreign state, but simply by an Islamist fanatic and a handful of co-conspirators.

So for Bush to declare "war" on Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda was actually to exaggerate their importance - and glorify their actions. Worse, it was his declaration of "war" that led in 2001 to the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan and, in 2003, to the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

Translation - Americans, you are TOO wedded to the ideal that the life of your compatriots is so important, and you should be more like us and tolerate a certain level of mass murder in order to get along. That you are not like us, and have thus 'dragged the world' into this situation we now abhor you. Since you are determined to be like this, it means YOU are the problem, not those who attacked you.

We get the picture, you fruit smelling twits. Do you?

SHAME Daily Mail. SHAME.

WWWSCD?

5 comments:

Anonymous said...

Fruit smelling twits. Heh.

Anonymous said...

Epa do you have a link for the original Daily Mail article?

Epaminondas said...

here

PATHETIC inheritors of the legacy of real men like Ronald Cartland, Harold McMillian, and Violet Bonham Carter, people who KNEW the difference. Irregardless of the concept of nation-state.

I am filled with puking disgust.
As much as I am for Moveon.

Pastorius said...

I'm so glad you wrote about this, Epa. I read about it last night and was so disgusted I also wanted to put up a post.

maccusgermanis said...

In fact the comparisons to Pearl Harbor do fail, but that does not lesson the impact of 9/11 on current Americans. Neither does failure of such comparisons disprove the wisdom of a vigorous response.

However terrible Pearl Harbor was, its aim and impact was strategic. The inability to project sufficient force in the Pacific is in stark contrast to the timely US operations in Afghanistan. You must add to your morbid totals for Pearl Harbor, our submariners sacrifices throughout the Pacific, the Bataan death march, and other successes of a ruthless, but calculating enemy.

That our current enemy prefered to count coup upon civilians rather than attack our ability to project force was their own mistake. Our military exists to protect our civilians. And in elimination of terrorist staging grounds, it has been successful.