.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Rantings of a Sandmonkey

Be forewarned: The writer of this blog is an extremely cynical, snarky, pro-US, secular, libertarian, disgruntled sandmonkey. If this is your cup of tea, please enjoy your stay here. If not, please sod off

Thursday, June 09, 2005


The reason why i did not post a comment or an opinion on this Post, is because i wanted to see an honest debate on the topic it presents between the two groups of people who come to this blog: Arabs/Muslims and Americans. One one hand, I can see the Arabs/Mulims supporting the creation of the IFC, because the prevelant sentiment here is more "If the american people know what happens in their name all over the world- which causes things like 9/11- they are more likely to oppose their government's international hegemony". The idea is that americans are ignorant of world events and history, and are easily misled and manipulated by their governments, so having such a thing in place will help educate them and make better "world citizens" out of them. On the other hand, I can see the americans i know being against the building of the IFC, because it gives the 9/11 attacks a certain historical justification, and gives it the context and the image of an act of resistance, not of terrorism. Compared to all the other horrible things that happend in world history in the fight for freedom (Whether it's people's reveloutions, the Haolocaust or Russian Gulags) and all the people that died for it, the 9/11 attacks will look small, and their emotional significance to the American people will get diminished. Not to mention, the list of people behind the IFC are the kind of people who oppenly encourage the defeat of the american military, and who equate the images of the Abu Gharib Pictures with the images of the WTC attacks. This puts them in a category of people that are dubbed "The Blame America First Crowd", and who are likely to project the image that the average american somehow deserved what happend to them that day, which is something that- understandably- the average american doesn't agree with at all or believe to be true and may find it to be hugely offensive. Keeping both sides in mind, i find myself leaning against creating the IFC, not because of the ideology behind it, but because it's the wrong response to those attacks. I visited the NYC WTC a couple of times before its collapse because i loved the building and i have seen it after it collapsed and the difference is staggering and sad. I rememebr as i was standing there and watching Ground Zero and the cleaning crews working there, i thought to myself that this attack was a powerful message to the US, and it's one that needs to be met with an equally powerful response. Which is why, in my opinion, the best way to memorialize what happend and respond to those who attacked the US that day, is to rebuild the Twin Towers, but - as Ricardo put it- make them "Stronger, Bigger and Taller". Show those who attacked you that what they did was futile and stupid and that it's not the way to declare your grievances with the US, no matter how justified you think them to be. A Bigger and Taller WTC would be a powerful symbol and response against those who attacked it and it would probably royally piss Ward Churchil off, which is always a sweet Bonus. This isn't because i am Pro-US mind you, this is because i am Anti-Terroristic stupidity. If the terrorists in Egypt bombed our WTC, my response would've been exactly the same: Rebuild it! Make it bigger, better, stronger and taller and tell those who bombed it that if they did it again, that you would rebuild it yet again and still make it better and bigger. That what they are doing is nothing but an exercise in futility at best, and that they are just wasting their time and effort if they think they can accomplish anything this way.


At 6/09/2005 07:38:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Simply put...It is the wrong place for it.

I'm really mad about it because I think it is disrespectful of people who died, their children, and families.

At 6/09/2005 08:47:00 AM, Blogger DaKruser said...

I WON"T post as anonymous. I think your suggestion is a very valid one SM. However, the US has only been "attacked" a couple of times in our history. Once, by the British (War of 1812), Pearl Harbor, and now the Trade Towers. We are kind of vengeful about stuff like that. The only people in the ENTIRE world that are more arrogant than we in the US concerning such things are the French. Fact is, Osama and the boys KNEW the US would do something about the attack. It was clear provocation, nothing more. They just didn't realize how far we would go to kick some Jihadi booty.
If we had thought clearly, we probably would have followed your advice, but, we as a nation have quite a temper to say the least. And, when our (as we say) "dander is up" well, this happens.
Sorry, this kind of turned into a rationalization of our actions, but, its not. This is just the way the population of the US thinks. We can be your best friend, or your worst nightmare, and many of the Islamic Extremists are not sleeping too well lately.

At 6/09/2005 10:23:00 AM, Blogger programmer craig said...

Rationalization of our actions, DaKruser? What were we supposed to do, ignore it and wait for the next attack? How would they (terrorists) have escalated from knockind down the world trade center?

And what would we have done when they did get a nuke, and used it? What would we have done when Washington DC vanished under a mushroom cloud?

Our response has been and remains the correct one. It's not a temper tantrum, it's self defense.

Incidentally, I'm not really on board with the Neocon theory that advocates changing the governments in the middle east to end terrorism. (which is what Iraq was all about) They may be right, but it doesn't really fit in with my world view. My response would be MUCH more militaristic. I don't really believe in trying to fight a war AND engage in diplomacy at the same time. Mixing politics and war is how the United States got in trouble in Vietnam.

At 6/09/2005 11:00:00 AM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

The first poster was me. I forgot to sign 'thinker'.

I was referring to the idea of Soro's boys doing an anti-American exhibit at the World Trade Center site. This is not the place to discuss the Soviet gulags or Abu Gharib, etc. Discussing those things somewhere else is not Anti-American.

I just think its disrespectful to the people who died.

At 6/09/2005 09:42:00 PM, Blogger Tina said...

Only in America can a man who came from a Communist background come to a country pennyless and become a multibillionair and then turn around and use the money he earned as a result of our freedoms to attack the very country that made him rich. Odd, isn't it?

George Soros could live in any country in the world in a luxury that is unimaginable, and yet which country's citizenship does he cling to? Yep, he's an American citizen. If he disapproves of us so much, why is he still a citizen? Because he knows that no other place on earth would allow him the freedom to be the total a$$ that he is.

At 6/09/2005 09:52:00 PM, Anonymous Desert Pig said...

I agree that the best response is to build structures bigger and taller than the destroyed buildings. I suggest that mountains of Muslim skulls of that size would be appropriate. It worked for the Mongols.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home