Here are a few differences.

The missles we have used have been targeted at military targets.  The Hijackers attacked purely civilian targets.  Unlike Tim McVei, their worst attacks were not even made at Government targets, but at civilian targets (World Trade Center).  And most of their foiled attempts before and since were also against purely civilian targets (LAX, Brooklyn Bridge, Wall Street Exchange).


True, but that's probably because these targets are the ones that would further their agenda the most if attacked.  That's not cowardly, it's strategic.


Also the Military is answerable to the President, and also to Congress.  And both of them are answerable to the People of the United States.  Al-Queda is answerable to nobody but one madman.  He makes all decisions, and has nobody he has to answer to.


Oh, Osama's a coward, no question.  But the suicide bombers are not; they're just demented.



I feel that any purposeful attack on innocent civilians is cowardly.  Most especially when it is done without any form of warning.  On 9/11, the people in New York had no idea that they were targets of a madman, and had no reason to expect they were going to be attacked.



You have a point here, but I will repeat: there is a fine line between valiance and stupidity.


If they were so brave, where have they been the last 5 years?  Hiding, because they know that if they tried it again, they would most likely be caught.


Again, that's stategy.  Why would you try to attack America if you knew you'd be caught?

True, but that's probably because these targets are the ones that would further their agenda the most if attacked.  That's not cowardly, it's strategic.


If all of their targets were Military or Government, I would not be as upset as I am about this.  The Pentagon?  Yes, I can see that as a "Legitimate" target.  The same with the USS Cole, and the Khobar Towers.  Even the embasy attacks are semi-legitimate, but I condem those because it is long international law that they and their staff should be excluded from acts of war.

The majority of attacks, both those planned and carried out, have been against civilian targets though.  To me, that is cowardly.  At least when they attack a military base, there is the justification that it is a valid target.  Not that I would excuse it, but the justification is there.

If all of their targets were Military or Government, I would not be as upset as I am about this.  The Pentagon?  Yes, I can see that as a "Legitimate" target.  The same with the USS Cole, and the Khobar Towers.  Even the embasy attacks are semi-legitimate, but I condem those because it is long international law that they and their staff should be excluded from acts of war.

The majority of attacks, both those planned and carried out, have been against civilian targets though.  To me, that is cowardly.  At least when they attack a military base, there is the justification that it is a valid target.  Not that I would excuse it, but the justification is there.


Good points, but you to remember that these terrorists think God is on their side and thus it doesn't matter who they kill. 

Killing yourself in order to kill civilians isn't any "wussier" than a suicide attack on a government facility.  It's very "evil", but it's not cowardly.

I think it's ultimately insulting to civilians to say it's "cowardly" to kill them. I think the whole thing was Bushist propaganda, they're crazy, not cowardly.

Osama Bin Laden is both loony and a coward... and one h*ll of a sociopath!!

I think it's ultimately insulting to civilians to say it's "cowardly" to kill them. I think the whole thing was Bushist propaganda, they're crazy, not cowardly.


And it is just as brave, when they blow up a bus in London, or a bunch of children in Israel, or a bunch of people trying to vote in Iraq?

This is not exactly a "US Only" situation.  Since they can't win through popular support, they are trying to win by popular horror.

I definitely wouldn't call them brave, just crazy, ignorant, misinformed. Anybody that would blow up themselves just to kill other people has some serious problems.

And it is just as brave, when they blow up a bus in London, or a bunch of children in Israel, or a bunch of people trying to vote in Iraq?

This is not exactly a "US Only" situation.  Since they can't win through popular support, they are trying to win by popular horror.
No,  it's more that they are evil personified, a bunch of socipathic misfits who think they can get nations to give in via mass murder and other types of terrorist mayhem. Terrorists are no better than serial killers..or dictators like Hitler and Stalin!

One word sums them all up..PSYCHOS!

And it is just as brave, when they blow up a bus in London, or a bunch of children in Israel, or a bunch of people trying to vote in Iraq?

This is not exactly a "US Only" situation.  Since they can't win through popular support, they are trying to win by popular horror.


It's not brave. Don't put words in my mouth. Something that isn't brave isn't necessarily cowardly. It's just horrible and wrong.

Cowardly or brave, the 9/11 massacres were necessary for the goals of the Bush Administration.  The Bushies are now as unpopular as beans on a bus trip, so they'll need an extra edge to keep the Republican majorities this year.  Look out for possible "terrorist attacks" in August or September '06!
:o

It's not brave. Don't put words in my mouth. Something that isn't brave isn't necessarily cowardly. It's just horrible and wrong.


I agree with you and I agree with CollegeGal.  It's not exactly brave, since bravery implies goodness, but it's not cowardly either. "Cowardly" implies that the acts were "wussy".  They were not wussy, in fact it would take a lot of guts to hijack a plane.  They were just awful and wrong.

I agree with you and I agree with CollegeGal.  It's not exactly brave, since bravery implies goodness, but it's not cowardly either. "Cowardly" implies that the acts were "wussy".  They were not wussy, in fact it would take a lot of guts to hijack a plane.  They were just awful and wrong.


Yeah I agree it's not brave or cowardly, just wrong and immoral.

Yeah I agree it's not brave or cowardly, just wrong and immoral.


Yeah, it's just sick.  There's no reason to make it sound worse than it is, if that's even possible.

The majority of attacks, both those planned and carried out, have been against civilian targets though.  To me, that is cowardly.  At least when they attack a military base, there is the justification that it is a valid target.  Not that I would excuse it, but the justification is there.


And bombing hospitals and public buildings to destroy the infrastructure in Baghdad is somehow different than destroying two large, important public building to destroy infrastructure in NYC, our largest and most important city?

And bombing hospitals and public buildings to destroy the infrastructure in Baghdad is somehow different than destroying two large, important public building to destroy infrastructure in NYC, our largest and most important city?

What are you some kinda troublemaker? Go over to the Group W bench and sit with Ward Churchill and the rest of terrorist sympathizers! 

Of course it's different, they're foreigners and we are Americans, so of course our lives are worth more, especially if you worked in a financial firm in the WTC and lived in Oyster Bay!  What's the matter with you anyway? You liberals just can't see the obvious!
:D

i detest ward churchill. he's the worst thing for the liberal cause since that labor MP who got booted recently whose name escapes me. you know, the one who debated the equally detestable christopher hitchens.

that said, i think the whole thing with the 9/11 terrorists being labeled as "cowardly" goes to the whole thing about civilians not counting as much if americans kill them. we know to the man, woman, and child how many people died in 9/11, but the pentagon can't even be bothered to count the innocent dead in iraq. colin powell said about the civiliian death toll there, "that's not a number that interests me."

anyone who says, oh, well, at least americans only pick military targest, is flat out wrong, as the US targeted a radio transmission tower in kosovo, targeted the hotel where journalists were staying in iraq, and has a history of targeting things like power plants and water purification facilities in the first gulf war onward. in grenada i believe they targeted a mental hospital. and in afghanistan they attacked the same red cross hospital twice. now you can say that these things had strategic value, but of course the al qaeda thugs would say the same thing about the WTC attacks. there were FBI and CIA offices in the WTC! obviously it was strategic relevance. that doesn't make the attack on it any less repugnant. and that's why i say bush and his fellow bureaucrat-killers in office are a helluva lot more like al qaeda than they are like you and me.

And bombing hospitals and public buildings to destroy the infrastructure in Baghdad is somehow different than destroying two large, important public building to destroy infrastructure in NYC, our largest and most important city?
The War in Iraq is wrong..but so was 9/11!

The "Let's Roll" passengers on doomed Flight 93 were truly brave...and the Al-Qaida hijackers and their leader Osama Bin Loser are wrong..no, beyond just wrong. Evil is a better word for AQ. And AQ does not confine their malice to American cities...they've attacked in Malaysia, Bali, and other countries..

To Osama and Al-Qaida...may you rot in Hades.

I feel that any purposeful attack on innocent civilians is cowardly.

That'd mean that the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, not to mention the aerial bombings of Dresden, Hamburg and many cities in Japan in World War Two were also cowardly.

i detest ward churchill. he's the worst thing for the liberal cause since that labor MP who got booted recently whose name escapes me. you know, the one who debated the equally detestable christopher hitchens.

that said, i think the whole thing with the 9/11 terrorists being labeled as "cowardly" goes to the whole thing about civilians not counting as much if americans kill them. we know to the man, woman, and child how many people died in 9/11, but the pentagon can't even be bothered to count the innocent dead in iraq. colin powell said about the civiliian death toll there, "that's not a number that interests me."

anyone who says, oh, well, at least americans only pick military targest, is flat out wrong, as the US targeted a radio transmission tower in kosovo, targeted the hotel where journalists were staying in iraq, and has a history of targeting things like power plants and water purification facilities in the first gulf war onward. in grenada i believe they targeted a mental hospital. and in afghanistan they attacked the same red cross hospital twice. now you can say that these things had strategic value, but of course the al qaeda thugs would say the same thing about the WTC attacks. there were FBI and CIA offices in the WTC! obviously it was strategic relevance. that doesn't make the attack on it any less repugnant. and that's why i say bush and his fellow bureaucrat-killers in office are a helluva lot more like al qaeda than they are like you and me.


I agree 100%.

The attackers, were they crazy? Yes. Were they cowardly? No. I may not have liked what they did, but I can't deny that it takes some (alot) of grit on someone's part to knowingly end their own life to accomplish a goal(no matter how nefarious).

One simple statement here... 9/11 has nothing to do with the war in Iraq. The Iraqis didn't attack the USA.  Why are we still tying the two together?  Bin Ladin  and Al Qaida have  nothing to do Iraq, contrary to what Bush and his cohorts will have the American public believe. I  truly believe Bush used 9/11  as a launching pad for his own specific agenda, and that is to get a foothold in the middle east.  (Insert Reason here...)

One simple statement here... 9/11 has nothing to do with the war in Iraq. The Iraqis didn't attack the USA.  Why are we still tying the two together?  Bin Ladin  and Al Qaida have  nothing to do Iraq, contrary to what Bush and his cohorts will have the American public believe. I  truly believe Bush used 9/11  as a launching pad for his own specific agenda, and that is to get a foothold in the middle east.  (Insert Reason here...)

See my previous post on this topic, first sentence.
;D
If I give Dubya the most credit I possibly can, I can only conclude--at best--he knew 9/11 was going to happen and let it happen for the sake of his administrations fascist agenda.  I have started calling the Republican part the FOGOP: Fascist-Occupied Grand Old Party!


The "Let's Roll" passengers on doomed Flight 93 were truly brave...
After 9/11, I wanted to market a brand of, ahem, "cigarette papers" called "LET'S ROLL!," but I didn't have the resources or the know-how. Maybe that's a good thing. I might be sitting in some dungeon right now for that gag!
:o

See my previous post on this topic, first sentence.
;D


Ah, yes, well that's the beauty of the Internet, as well as The Good old U S of A,  we are all entitled to our opinions.

After 9/11, I wanted to market a brand of, ahem, "cigarette papers" called "LET'S ROLL!," but I didn't have the resources or the know-how. Maybe that's a good thing. I might be sitting in some dungeon right now for that gag!
:o


When you smoke foreign, you're rolling with Osama. Buy domestic!

;D ;D Remember the old WWII posters "when you ride alone, you ride with Hitler"? XD

I hope Moussaoui gets the death penalty for masterminding the 9/11 attacks. Fry his a$$!

Saddam was not responsible for 9/11 and Bush knew that. Why that fool got us involved in Iraq, I'll never fathom. We got Saddam out, I know I'm gonna get a lot of s*it for this, but we need to get out and concentrate on finding Osama Bin Laden and making him pay for sponsoring acts of terror worldwide.

The 9/11 attacks were brilliant when you think about it.  Any "madman" could run into a building and start shooting as many people as possible but these folks managed to conceal weapons, sneaking them into the flight, knifing people here and there without being suspected, and made their way to the cockpit and took control.  I'm not praising them of course, but the whole plan was genius.

The 9/11 attacks were brilliant when you think about it.  Any "madman" could run into a building and start shooting as many people as possible but these folks managed to conceal weapons, sneaking them into the flight, knifing people here and there without being suspected, and made their way to the cockpit and took control.  I'm not praising them of course, but the whole plan was genius.
the most amazing part was having the towers fall on live television, scaring the living crap out of the entire country.

and the numerology of the date, of course. the attacks were planned to have a devastating psychological effect on all americans.

The 9/11 attacks were brilliant when you think about it.  Any "madman" could run into a building and start shooting as many people as possible but these folks managed to conceal weapons, sneaking them into the flight, knifing people here and there without being suspected, and made their way to the cockpit and took control.  I'm not praising them of course, but the whole plan was genius.


They were a stroke of genius.  While I certainly don't condone them, you've got to admit they executed the plan amazingly well.