Quantcast
Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
    1. Welcome to GTAForums!

    1. Red Dead Redemption 2

      1. PC
      2. Gameplay
      3. Missions
      4. Help & Support
    2. Red Dead Online

      1. Gameplay
      2. Find Lobbies & Outlaws
      3. Help & Support
      4. Frontier Pursuits
    1. Crews & Posses

      1. Recruitment
    2. Events

    1. GTA Online

      1. DLC
      2. Find Lobbies & Players
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Vehicles
      5. Content Creator
      6. Help & Support
      7. The Diamond Casino Heist
    2. Grand Theft Auto Series

    3. GTA 6

    4. GTA V

      1. PC
      2. Guides & Strategies
      3. Help & Support
    5. GTA IV

      1. Episodes from Liberty City
      2. Multiplayer
      3. Guides & Strategies
      4. Help & Support
      5. GTA IV Mods
    6. GTA Chinatown Wars

    7. GTA Vice City Stories

    8. GTA Liberty City Stories

    9. GTA San Andreas

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA SA Mods
    10. GTA Vice City

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA VC Mods
    11. GTA III

      1. Guides & Strategies
      2. Help & Support
      3. GTA III Mods
    12. Top Down Games

      1. GTA Advance
      2. GTA 2
      3. GTA
    13. Wiki

      1. Merchandising
    1. GTA Modding

      1. GTA V
      2. GTA IV
      3. GTA III, VC & SA
      4. Tutorials
    2. Mod Showroom

      1. Scripts & Plugins
      2. Maps
      3. Total Conversions
      4. Vehicles
      5. Textures
      6. Characters
      7. Tools
      8. Other
      9. Workshop
    3. Featured Mods

      1. DYOM
      2. OpenIV
      3. GTA: Underground
      4. GTA: Liberty City
      5. GTA: State of Liberty
    1. Red Dead Redemption

    2. Rockstar Games

    1. Off-Topic

      1. General Chat
      2. Gaming
      3. Technology
      4. Programming
      5. Movies & TV
      6. Music
      7. Sports
      8. Vehicles
    2. Expression

      1. Graphics / Visual Arts
      2. GFX Requests & Tutorials
      3. Writers' Discussion
      4. Debates & Discussion
    1. News

    2. Forum Support

    3. Site Suggestions

Sign in to follow this  
Svip

Was September 11th really a terroist attack?

Recommended Posts

AllDoItTheSame

you said we were focusing more on civillian targets is all, and im saying that regardless, it was the most effective. Anyways, you make good points

 

i would like to adress this comment

 

Throughout history US has not shown they're capable of winning wars on the ground, they have been fighting cowardly in almost EVERY SINGLE WAR!!!

 

i like the word cowardly, yet i think another would be better, "Intelligently". The atomic bomb and chemical attacks aside, when in all of history were superior weapons not used. Do you think that gunpowder should never have been invented because it was superior to arrows? Do you think horses should have never been used because it was "unfair" to the other side? Do you think that Britain should never have used radar against the nazis? Technology is an advantage that only great cunning can overcome

 

Not a single war on the ground? As i recall, during the American revolution, and the war of 1812, when aircraft other than balloons didnt exist, the US HAD to fight on the ground. World war one anybody? I seem to recall that the US fought in the trenches on the ground with all of their opposition. Yes, planes were used, but by both sides. In world war two, were there NO ground battles? D-day, while not exclusively american, was one of the most amazing assaults of all time, and guess what, normandy is ground. Sure, they came across water, but how the hell are you supposed to march from england to france? And please dont say we fought japan by sea because we were cowards, but it was necessary, and even then there were many land battles. remember Iwo Jima?

user posted image

yeah that one. Does that look like an air battle? Dont call us cowards, we've given (and still give) life after life to neutralize dangerous enemies like hitler. Even today in the war in iraq that has so many protests, the US is using ground troops. And we didnt lose the vietnam war because it was on the ground, but lazzo already adressed that. and personally i want to see how you defend that americans are still cowardly.

 

P.S.- Im not a fan of any american war in the middle east currently, so dont shove that sh*t in my face.

Edited by AllDoItTheSame

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Svip

Only in a few examples has the US taken the "coward" option out of the war.

 

I would recall the nuclear bombings of Japan as a form of quick way out of the war. There are many reasons why they did it, and one of them I am quite sure was to end this war, now.

 

One of them was to test the nuclear missile, cause it hadn't been tested before. Also, did they want to show both Japan and most importantly the USSR that the US now had nuclear bombs.

 

Though the USSR and US fought along side in World War II, didn't it mean they were planning both a way to win over the other after the war. The USSR did take the bombing of Japan as a form of warning. Though the USSR didn't have to wait long for themselves to invent the same bomb.

 

So the bombing of Japan was a military act, a political act, a fast exit act and most importantly a terroist act.

 

One said that terroists normally use any way out, yes, terroist that doesn't have any form of government support. If you have government support, or is a government yourself, you would probably plan your action much better.

 

And don't forget September 11th ( note: I would write 11/9 myself, cause I'm European ), the terroist has lots of other targets, yet they didn't went for them?

 

Doesn't make it terroist or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The_man
Err, while it may technically be considered a terrorist attack on Japan, it was moreso to save US soldiers' lives. Figures of how high the invasion of the Japanese islands ranged anywhere from 750,000 to 1,000,000 casulties. That is a huge amount of soldiers that were not needed to die for an already dying war, especially one we didn't start.

 

Consider the Atomic Bomb "Plan B" for the US's military strategy. Also, it was more of a scare tactic than anything. We dropped one so that they knew we had the potential. We dropped the second one to make them believe we had more and continuing the war would result in even larger catastrophes.

 

By the way, there is no straight, completely just path in warfare. Someone said this, but I can't remember who:

 

"The point of war is not to die for your country, but to make the other bastard die for his." -WWII era public figure

the WWII public figure was general george patton. biggrin.gif

 

 

A terror attack is meant to instill fear, and this is what it was. It is also to create instability, and that is what it was.

 

9/11 made everybody afraid to fly or do anything. Thats just what obl wanted. So, in short, i belive it was a terror attack and an act of war. Thats why we are at war. With terrorists. The reason it was a terror attack is because it was on innocent people.

 

Any open and direct attack on innocents is such.

 

You can always say "oh we kill civilians in iraq"

however these are isolated innocents and we never delclared war on the people of iraq, whereas obl openly attacked the people of america.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
reptilexcq
This just proves you have a f*cked up point of view on the world, no offense. The Bible thing did it.

Once again, you demonize the United States but what about the rest of the world? The Japanese weren't exactly innocent? Remember how they treated other Asian countries? They sent women into prostitution, killed civilians, etc. No country is innocent. Every country has their dark side. Extremist Muslims don't only hate U.S. citizens (well, they more or less hate the American lifestyle)...they hate Jews and non-Muslims (and probably any other Muslim who doesn't support them) also (id est the world infedel isn't it?). Is that why they (extremists) beheaded Japanese too? And no, the United States don't hate the Japanese either. You have this f*cked up perception believing that this is the case. In fact, I have some Chinese and Japanese friends and I'm from the United States. There is no anti-Japansese tone here  nor any anti-Asian tone. You have really absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The bomb was dropped for several reasons. None of which were hate.

 

Sorry about the screwy grammar, bad paragraph structure and the bad spelling. It's late.

You said no country is innocent...that is exactly what i mean when i said America will be judged and condemmed in the END WAR for what she did to other countries. Nevermind what other did, but what America did is just as worse.

 

Yes the US don't hate Japan now, but i am talking about back then.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Forelli_Boy
You said no country is innocent...that is exactly what i mean when i said America will be judged and condemmed in the END WAR for what she did to other countries. Nevermind what other did, but what America did is just as worse.

Nevermind that it's the "imported" Iraqi insurgents that are slaughtering civilians and people just trying to rebuild their lives after Saddam, more often than American soldiers do (though they still haven't beaten the American Vietnam record). Never mind that Saddam and his family did horrible things to his own people far more often than the highly publicized incidents in Gitmo, and possibly sold off his weapons of mass destruction behind the backs of the United Nations inspectors.

 

Granted, one day some lunatics will wipe the United States out of existence with chemicals, nukes, etc. and the survivors will say we deserve it as anarchy takes over. But as long as I die without fear of these things (it'll be so sudden that there's no time to be scared!) I can at least be proud I won this war on terror.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
De_Spank
Svip, the Vietnam war was one of the biggest mistakes in the United States's history. My father was a veteran of that particular conflict and has told me several accounts of what the civilian population would do to U.S. forces there. One such situation was a young Vietnamese boy was near an Army jeep. He looked harmless but while no one was looking he attempted to slip a gernade into the gas-tank with a rubberband wraped around the spoon. The boy was caught my father said and confessed to doing it several times before where jeeps just sort of 'randomly' exploded. He also said that the Viet Cong would employ the use of female snipers in civilians clothing. In all reality there were really no civilians in Vietnam. Civilians by day and Viet Cong by night. Added onto that there was a draft in effect so American forces were drafted into the conflict. Being loyal to their country they served without question. Many of the terrorists now voluntarily join the ranks to wage jihad. No offense but your parallels are completely worthless. Quit trying to demonize every nation you don't like. Its a sill waste of time when you could be doing something productive.

 

About the British bombardment...you forget that it was Admiral Horatio Nelson who ordered this. Reading this also brought a smile to my face. You don't even know your nations history. Denmark was neutral and it wasn't about lowering moral. Nelson had grown tired of the Danes profiting from wartime foregin trade and had heard rumors that the Danes were going to offer up its fleet up to Napoleon. To stay on topic about the Brits, you know why they bombed Hamburg and Dresdan? Did you happen to forget that the Germans bombed the living hell out of almost ever major British city? I can't say that I agree with revenge but it wasn't because they wanted to be nasty.

Lazzo that exact incident happend to my father in Vietnam. Except it actually exploded. He got knocked out but luckily was found by a CAP platoon.

 

However, i think saying there were no civilians in Vietnam is going a bit far. That was the kind of attitude that let soldiers waste entire villages of worthless 'gooks' and rape women claiming they were all VC.

 

The civilian population was always split in half. One supported the Cong, one supported the Government. I can understand why someone would say from an American point of view there were no civilians in the Vietnam War because Americans always fought in VC dominated areas with a strong civilian Communist following.

 

VC were very good at employing civilians. Civilians were scared sh*tless of the VC, they ruled by example. If a group of VC come to your house and request that your three sons help them dig trenches for two months you definately wouldn't decline.

 

But your statement claiming there were no innocent Vietnamese is just not true.

 

Families like mine remained loyal to the Government and the US until the day North Vietnamese tanks were rolling down Saigon.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lazzo
Lazzo that exact incident happend to my father in Vietnam. Except it actually exploded. He got knocked out but luckily was found by a CAP platoon.

 

However, i think saying there were no civilians in Vietnam is going a bit far. That was the kind of attitude that let soldiers waste entire villages of worthless 'gooks' and rape women claiming they were all VC.

 

The civilian population was always split in half. One supported the Cong, one supported the Government. I can understand why someone would say from an American point of view there were no civilians in the Vietnam War because Americans always fought in VC dominated areas with a strong civilian Communist following.

 

VC were very good at employing civilians. Civilians were scared sh*tless of the VC, they ruled by example. If a group of VC come to your house and request that your three sons help them dig trenches for two months you definately wouldn't decline.

 

But your statement claiming there were no innocent Vietnamese is just not true.

 

Families like mine remained loyal to the Government and the US until the day North Vietnamese tanks were rolling down Saigon.

 

 

 

 

I probably was a bit too bold with that statement and I apologize. I suppose I can't understand the fact that the South Vietnamese would subject themselves to being 'forced' into service for the VC. In my mind, if the VC were actively forcing South Vietnamese citizens to 'join them or die' the intelligence on the VC for both the South Vietnamese and United States would have been greater. It would uncovered supposed threats and cells.

 

I guess my original statement was fueled by how only a little over a million troops were used by the Army of the Republic of Vietnam and the corruption of the Diem regime and and the less help given by the ARVN after the coup in 1963.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • 2 Users Currently Viewing
    0 members, 0 Anonymous, 2 Guests

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using GTAForums.com, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.