Thursday, 12 September 2013

Quote of the day: “9/11 was not a ‘tragedy.’ It was an act of war …”

“On Dec 7, 1941 Japan attacked the United States. We
fought in multiple theatres, against industrialised war
machines. In less than 4 years, we won unconditional victory.

“On Sep 11, 2001 something happened. We lit candles,
but bickered over what and who. We fought against a
tactic, and for the ‘hearts and minds’ of our enemies.
12 years later, we can’t even define victory. We are now
considering helping an enemy take over Syria.

“9/11 was not a ‘tragedy.’ It was an act of war. The
endless denial, appeasement, flailing, and conspiracy
theories are the tragedy.”

- Keith Weiner


  1. I'm not sure when the US fought "for the 'hearts and minds'" of their enemies.

  2. This is not to say they were successful. You might call it their "foreign policy of guilt."

  3. I find that quote incoherent (possibly because it is incomplete?) in that as it lambasts the U.S for fighting the incorporeal tactic 'terror' when it argues the U.S should have reacted as it did to Japan's attack in 1941 sans specifying the correct target and identifying the enemy to war with it says very little.

  4. The libbos would have nuked the entire Middle East killing millions of innocent people coz that's consistent with the non-initiation of force principle. At least that's what your current cult leader Lenny wanted.

  5. From Russia Today:

    RT: Decades of Terror against their own population, blamed on “extremists”, has actually been funded and planned by the White House, top-level officials in the government and the CIA confirmed. The campaign known as Gladio is called by former CIA head Bill Colby a “major operation.”

  6. I've read the article about 'foreign policy of guilt' and it's pretty clear that it was written by someone who has a hugely over-simplistic view of international relations. The idea that 'the West' (what does that term even mean now where the post-WW2 political convergence is somewhat disintegrating) is propping up totalitarian states is completely incongruent with the realities of hard-line policies imposed by America in the Middle East. Their descriptions of both Palestinians and Africans ignores a huge amount of history and indulges in inaccurate stereotyping. There are so many articles out there that give far more nuanced analyses of the issues touched on in this barely credible article.

  7. @Anon - Unless you can provide some examples of this alleged over-simplification and inaccuracy (as opposed to just asserting it) the article has more credibility for me than your critique of it.


1. Commenters are welcome and invited.
2. All comments are moderated. Off-topic grandstanding, spam, and gibberish will be ignored. Tu quoque will be moderated.
3. Read the post before you comment. Challenge facts, but don't simply ignore them.
4. Use a name. If it's important enough to say, it's important enough to put a name to.
5. Above all: Act with honour. Say what you mean, and mean what you say.