9/11 tribute controversy

by **Dolphin Ziggler** Mon 14 Sep 2015, 7:44 pm

Entourage actor Adrian Grenier caused some outrage online friday by posting this image in remembrance of the victims of 9/11

9/11 tribute controversy 2C48D05100000578-3233179-image-a-8_1442185793891

9/11 tribute controversy 2C48D05100000578-3233179-image-a-8_1442185793891

Whilst he could have just not done that on a day like the anniversary of 9/11, is it such an outrageous thing to say? Is it fair that people on the internet (according to the, urgh, Daily Mail article) have branded it 'classless' and a 'slap in the face' to terror victims?

by TRUSSMAN66 Mon 14 Sep 2015, 7:56 pm

Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing.......

What makes both the UK and USA great........

by TRUSSMAN66 Mon 14 Sep 2015, 8:21 pm

The problem with twerps like this guy is that he doesn't know Afghanistan was a consequence of 9/11..........

Iraq was to do with WMDs..........

So yes it is outrageous............

People should learn their history....

by **Dolphin Ziggler** Mon 14 Sep 2015, 9:47 pm

.......................

by TRUSSMAN66 Mon 14 Sep 2015, 9:52 pm

Okay buddy..It was a comment on the kid..Not an invitation to debate....

Love your post. Keep up the good work. thumbsup

by Guest Tue 15 Sep 2015, 6:24 am

Firstly a significant number of people believe as Adrian Grenier so it represents a view that a number of people share.

Secondly A question for Adrian Grenier: why didn't he use the image of the crashed plane heading to the White House as symbol or why didn't he use the image of the damaged Pentagon? What was his thinking in using the twin towers symbol rather than one of the other two symbols?

Thirdly I should ask Adrian Grenier who his "9/11 tribute" was aimed at - was it aimed at the relatives and friends of those that died in the twin towers, the people of New York, the US People, the US Government, the previous Bush government, his own mates - group of friends ... who?
[If it was his own twitter account then I guess it was aimed to his mates & followers]

and Finally I should ask Adrian Grenier: having established who the "9/11 tribute" was aimed at - what sort of response was he hoping for?
[If it was aimed to his mates & followers I guess the response he would be expecting are "pats on the back", approving nods, free beers the next time he meets up with them.]

Then I would ask Adrian Grenier some questions on Iraq such as:
1) Who are the Iraqi people? Are they a homogenous group or are they a heterogeneous group?
2) Do the various people in Iraq have any agency of their own?
3) What influence if any do the neighbouring countries have in Iraq? [Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey].

by Derbymanc Tue 15 Sep 2015, 8:21 am

This image has been doing the rounds on social media for a few days and I think it originates from Tumblr (although not certain). I don't think it's meant to say Iraqis were blamed for 9/11 more that the US (and co) have been responsible for more innocent deaths anyway. There's another image of Saddam doing the rounds as well stating how he had all these little factions under control.

Whilst like Truss says, it's good to have free speech, think theirs a time and a place and the anniversary of 9/11 was definitely not the time.

by Guest Tue 15 Sep 2015, 8:29 am

Does that mean then that Adrian Grenier was probably just retweeting something sent to him and the source of these "911 tributes" came from elsewhere ...

by **ShahenshahG** Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:04 am

http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/01/sprj.irq.bush.speech/

"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11th, 2001, and still goes on."

Bush said that in the 19 months since the attacks on New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, "nearly half of al Qaeda's senior operatives have been captured or killed."

Bush described al Qaeda as "wounded, but not destroyed" and said the United States would continue to hunt down members of the terrorist network.

He also said removing Saddam from power would make other nations less vulnerable to terrorist attacks.

There is a direct link. I guess it got lost in the WMD and the aftermath but there was a link. Its probably more remembered over there hence the tweet

by Derbymanc Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:21 am

Yeah, just found the original that was doing the rounds before that picture was added

'R.I.P. The 2976 American people that lost their lives on 9/11 and R.I.P. the 48,644 Afghan and 1,690,903 Iraqi and 35000 Pakistani people that paid the ultimate price for a crime they did not commit'

If I find the original with the picture I'll put that up too.

Note: I'm not trying to offend anyone or be 'disrespectful' just showing where it's started from. I have nothing but respect for those that lost their lives in 9/11 and believe if this was going to be done at all it should have been on a different day

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:23 am

Absolutley nothing wrong with what he posted.

Its an anti war statement if nothing else and it respects the innocent victims cought up in this so called war.

When people question this post then you have to wonder which of satans children they are. Right wing media in the states looks to dehumanize people into seeing people of other nations and skin color as sub human or ''collateral'' as they love to put it.

His actions by posting a simple tribute to ALL victims has exposed the vile cretens that we sadly have to share this earth with.

by Guest Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:23 am

ShahenshahG wrote:http://edition.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/05/01/sprj.irq.bush.speech/

[i]"The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September 11th, 2001, and still goes on." ...

Well I have to concede George Bush and his administration used / manipulated the 911 images including the twin towers in claiming legitimacy of his subsequent foreign policy and home policy (setting up "Homeland Security").

by Guest Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:27 am

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:... When people question this post then you have to wonder which of satans children they are. ...

When people are prevented from questioning things then that is the road to authoritarianism.

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:29 am

Derbymanc wrote:This image has been doing the rounds on social media for a few days and I think it originates from Tumblr (although not certain). I don't think it's meant to say Iraqis were blamed for 9/11 more that the US (and co) have been responsible for more innocent deaths anyway. There's another image of Saddam doing the rounds as well stating how he had all these little factions under control.

Whilst like Truss says, it's good to have free speech, think theirs a time and a place and the anniversary of 9/11 was definitely not the time.

There are statues and plaques dedicted to people who have commited or been involved with GENOCIDE.

Your heros NOT my heros
My heros NOT your heros.

by Derbymanc Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:32 am

What are you waffling about now you Herbert

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 9:37 am

Nore Staat wrote:
ONETWOFOREVER wrote:... When people question this post then you have to wonder which of satans children they are. ...

When people are prevented from questioning things then that is the road to authoritarianism.

We are already there mate.

This guy posted an anti war statement nothing more. Its easier for some people to ignore the suffering of others. Rather they will let FOX news dictate how they should view the world and who has the right to be killed and who does not.

by Derbymanc Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:07 am

He's got 364 other days of the year to post it 1/2, why not let the families greive on the one day they have. Also it's funny how this blows up on this one day whilst next week all these 'anti-war messages' will disappear by next week.

That's my problem with it, whilst you may be a bit of a cuckoo in regards to your conspiracies, at least your in it all the time, think some of these do it to 'be in with the kids' (As lets be honest, if it's from Tumblr it's not likely to be a big movement of people)

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:11 am

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Absolutley nothing wrong with what he posted.

Its an anti war statement if nothing else and it respects the innocent victims cought up in this so called war.

When people question this post then you have to wonder which of satans children they are. Right wing media in the states looks to dehumanize people into seeing people of other nations and skin color as sub human or ''collateral'' as they love to put it.

His actions by posting a simple tribute to ALL victims has exposed the vile cretens that we sadly have to share this earth with.

One was a cowardly terrorist act in the name of religion............against a Country who was given no warning by the perpetrators and wasn't even at war..

You are beyond contempt...

SADDAM was warned about WMDS and asked to let people look for them....He didn't comply..(Yes how often that is forgotten..killed a few kurds too that swell guy)

Afghanistan was a consequence of 9/11 and we asked them to let us in before invading...

Never been happier to be a SATAN's child..

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:17 am

Do you genuinely believe that all those innocent Iraqis deserved to die?

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:19 am

Alistair wrote:Do you genuinely believe that all those innocent Iraqis deserved to die?

Not going to bother with that....

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:27 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
Alistair wrote:Do you genuinely believe that all those innocent Iraqis deserved to die?

Not going to bother with that....

Why? Cause you're going to try and justify their deaths with the people of 9/11? Because you really are that narrow minded that you believe an 'eye for an eye' is fair and just?

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:29 am

by Derbymanc Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:32 am

Knock it off Alistair, just because you don't agree with someone no need to go slinging crap like that about

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:33 am

Fine.

Maybe he'll have the balls to answer the question then rather than 'not bothering'.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:45 am

Alistair wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
Alistair wrote:Do you genuinely believe that all those innocent Iraqis deserved to die?

Not going to bother with that....

Why? Cause you're going to try and justify their deaths with the people of 9/11? Because you really are that narrow minded that you believe an 'eye for an eye' is fair and just?

Where have I justified the deaths ??

Why are you so dumb ??

by **seanmichaels** Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:46 am

Trouble with the Middle east is they'd be having a ruck even if we hadn't got involved. The first Gulf War (Iran v Iraq) claimed 1.5million + lives.

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:56 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Absolutley nothing wrong with what he posted.

Its an anti war statement if nothing else and it respects the innocent victims cought up in this so called war.

When people question this post then you have to wonder which of satans children they are. Right wing media in the states looks to dehumanize people into seeing people of other nations and skin color as sub human or ''collateral'' as they love to put it.

His actions by posting a simple tribute to ALL victims has exposed the vile cretens that we sadly have to share this earth with.

One was a cowardly terrorist act in the name of religion............against a Country who was given no warning by the perpetrators and wasn't even at war..

You are beyond contempt...

SADDAM was warned about WMDS and asked to let people look for them....He didn't comply..(Yes how often that is forgotten..killed a few kurds too that swell guy)

Afghanistan was a consequence of 9/11 and we asked them to let us in before invading...

Never been happier to be a SATAN's child..

There you go Trussman.

At what point have you NOT justified them.

'Afghanistan was a consequence'.... so all the innocent people that died there were part of the consequences were they? Casualties of war?

Because Saddam was warned that means the entire country deserved to suffer.

You're quite clever in the fact that you never actually come out and say it, you just allude to it, you probably couldn't give a toss about all the innocent people who died in those wars because they aren't American.

It's the classic 'they started it, we finished it' mentality and whoever gets caught in the crossfire, tough luck.

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:56 am

seanmichaels wrote:Trouble with the Middle east is they'd be having a ruck even if we hadn't got involved. The first Gulf War (Iran v Iraq) claimed 1.5million + lives.

You have no idea of the level of interferance from the west in the middle east. Yes a large part of the population are a bunch of fanatical lunitics but the west has helped the situation blow up as it is today.

Did you know that IRAN once democratically elected a president or leader back in the 1950's but he fell foul of the US because he wanted to share the nations oil wealth with its people (what a horrible man) but the CIA had other ideas.

Look it up if you can be bothered.

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 10:57 am

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:Trouble with the Middle east is they'd be having a ruck even if we hadn't got involved. The first Gulf War (Iran v Iraq) claimed 1.5million + lives.

You have no idea of the level of interferance from the west in the middle east. Yes a large part of the population are a bunch of fanatical lunitics but the west has helped the situation blow up as it is today.

Did you know that IRAN once democratically elected a president or leader back in the 1950's but he fell foul of the US because he wanted to share the nations oil wealth with its people (what a horrible man) but the CIA had other ideas.

Look it up if you can be bothered.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1953_Iranian_coup_d%27%C3%A9tat

by Guest Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:00 am

It would be interesting to begin to break the following statement down:

"1,455,590 innocent Iraqis who died during the U.S. invasion for something they didn’t do.”

1) Where did the figure "1,455,590" come from?
2) Were these all direct deaths?
3) Were all these civilians?
3) Of the direct deaths how many were due to weapons fired by US military.
4) Of the direct deaths how many were due to Iraqi versus Iraqi conflict (suicide bombing of market places, mosques etc)
5) Of the direct deaths how many were due to Iraqi versus insurgents from Syria, Iran etc.

It goes without question that we should all say RIP to all innocent people who die.

I agree that if one invades a country and topples the head of a regime and the regime itself, then some responsibility must be accepted by the invaders regarding what happens afterwards.

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:05 am

Nore Staat wrote:It would be interesting to begin to break the following statement down:

"1,455,590 innocent Iraqis who died during the U.S. invasion for something they didn’t do.”

1) Where did the figure "1,455,590" come from?
2) Were these all direct deaths?
3) Were all these civilians?
3) Of the direct deaths how many were due to weapons fired by US military.
4) Of the direct deaths how many were due to Iraqi versus Iraqi conflict (suicide bombing of market places, mosques etc)
5) Of the direct deaths how many were due to Iraqi versus insurgents from Syria, Iran etc.

It goes without question that we should all say RIP to all innocent people who die.

No point asking these questions.

I think the guy was just pointing out the victims toll but he wanted to pay tribute to ALL victims. Plus 9-11 had nothing to do with Saddam thats been established. Also the apparent link has been exposed as a lie. I hope everyone remembers this, that the biggest victims of this so called war on terror has been the people of the middle east Iraq, Afghanistan, Lybia and now Syria.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:07 am

Alistair wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Absolutley nothing wrong with what he posted.

Its an anti war statement if nothing else and it respects the innocent victims cought up in this so called war.

When people question this post then you have to wonder which of satans children they are. Right wing media in the states looks to dehumanize people into seeing people of other nations and skin color as sub human or ''collateral'' as they love to put it.

His actions by posting a simple tribute to ALL victims has exposed the vile cretens that we sadly have to share this earth with.

One was a cowardly terrorist act in the name of religion............against a Country who was given no warning by the perpetrators and wasn't even at war..

You are beyond contempt...

SADDAM was warned about WMDS and asked to let people look for them....He didn't comply..(Yes how often that is forgotten..killed a few kurds too that swell guy)

Afghanistan was a consequence of 9/11 and we asked them to let us in before invading...

Never been happier to be a SATAN's child..

There you go Trussman.

At what point have you NOT justified them.

'Afghanistan was a consequence'.... so all the innocent people that died there were part of the consequences were they? Casualties of war?

Because Saddam was warned that means the entire country deserved to suffer.

You're quite clever in the fact that you never actually come out and say it, you just allude to it, you probably couldn't give a toss about all the innocent people who died in those wars because they aren't American.

It's the classic 'they started it, we finished it' mentality and whoever gets caught in the crossfire, tough luck.

Pointless responding to this crap..

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:08 am

Nore Staat wrote:It would be interesting to begin to break the following statement down:

"1,455,590 innocent Iraqis who died during the U.S. invasion for something they didn’t do.”

1) Where did the figure "1,455,590" come from?
2) Were these all direct deaths?
3) Were all these civilians?
3) Of the direct deaths how many were due to weapons fired by US military.
4) Of the direct deaths how many were due to Iraqi versus Iraqi conflict (suicide bombing of market places, mosques etc)
5) Of the direct deaths how many were due to Iraqi versus insurgents from Syria, Iran etc.

It goes without question that we should all say RIP to all innocent people who die.

I agree that if one invades a country and topples the head of a regime and the regime itself, then some responsibility must be accepted by the invaders regarding what happens afterwards.

Whilst it's only a base, the Iraq study showed that between 2003-2013 there were around 120,000 civilian noncombatants reported as killed.

by **seanmichaels** Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:10 am

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:Trouble with the Middle east is they'd be having a ruck even if we hadn't got involved. The first Gulf War (Iran v Iraq) claimed 1.5million + lives.

You have no idea of the level of interferance from the west in the middle east. Yes a large part of the population are a bunch of fanatical lunitics but the west has helped the situation blow up as it is today.

Did you know that IRAN once democratically elected a president or leader back in the 1950's but he fell foul of the US because he wanted to share the nations oil wealth with its people (what a horrible man) but the CIA had other ideas.

Look it up if you can be bothered.

They love a ruck. Build a wall round it and let them destroy each other. Less terrorism, once it is finished we can re-house the refugees. Simple.

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:10 am

You are a proud yank TRUSS but try to see the world from other peoples point of view. Don't let FOX news and co de humanize you TRUSS because you are a good guy I know but you must see that its more complicated then good v evil.

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:11 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
Alistair wrote:
TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Absolutley nothing wrong with what he posted.

Its an anti war statement if nothing else and it respects the innocent victims cought up in this so called war.

When people question this post then you have to wonder which of satans children they are. Right wing media in the states looks to dehumanize people into seeing people of other nations and skin color as sub human or ''collateral'' as they love to put it.

His actions by posting a simple tribute to ALL victims has exposed the vile cretens that we sadly have to share this earth with.

One was a cowardly terrorist act in the name of religion............against a Country who was given no warning by the perpetrators and wasn't even at war..

You are beyond contempt...

SADDAM was warned about WMDS and asked to let people look for them....He didn't comply..(Yes how often that is forgotten..killed a few kurds too that swell guy)

Afghanistan was a consequence of 9/11 and we asked them to let us in before invading...

Never been happier to be a SATAN's child..

There you go Trussman.

At what point have you NOT justified them.

'Afghanistan was a consequence'.... so all the innocent people that died there were part of the consequences were they? Casualties of war?

Because Saddam was warned that means the entire country deserved to suffer.

You're quite clever in the fact that you never actually come out and say it, you just allude to it, you probably couldn't give a toss about all the innocent people who died in those wars because they aren't American.

It's the classic 'they started it, we finished it' mentality and whoever gets caught in the crossfire, tough luck.

Pointless responding to this crap..

Of course it is, you wouldn't deny it because it's true. Because even on a little forum in the corner of the Internet, you would rather hide behind 'pointless replies' than admit to being a bigot.

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:12 am

seanmichaels wrote:
ONETWOFOREVER wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:Trouble with the Middle east is they'd be having a ruck even if we hadn't got involved. The first Gulf War (Iran v Iraq) claimed 1.5million + lives.

You have no idea of the level of interferance from the west in the middle east. Yes a large part of the population are a bunch of fanatical lunitics but the west has helped the situation blow up as it is today.

Did you know that IRAN once democratically elected a president or leader back in the 1950's but he fell foul of the US because he wanted to share the nations oil wealth with its people (what a horrible man) but the CIA had other ideas.

Look it up if you can be bothered.

They love a ruck. Build a wall round it and let them destroy each other. Less terrorism, once it is finished we can re-house the refugees. Simple.

Well they may love a ruck but nothing compares to the good ol Europeans who can obliterate 50 MILLION people in 5 years

by **ShahenshahG** Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:13 am

seanmichaels wrote:Trouble with the Middle east is they'd be having a ruck even if we hadn't got involved. The first Gulf War (Iran v Iraq) claimed 1.5million + lives.

UK and US made Saddam attack iran and supplied him the weapons to do so after their puppet king was toppled. Then when Iran got the upper hand he was supplied with chemical weapons by uk u.s and france which forced the stalemate.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:14 am

3,000 people died.............
4.5 billion damage in building destruction..
350 million in civilian aircraft..
1.3 billion in clean up costs......
Air traffic revenue 10 billion...
95 billion lost in taxes..
83,000 job losses
Tens of thousands of people traumatized..............

Catastrophic event............and we are supposed to do NOTHING !!

What did we do.............We asked the TALIBAN to hand the c**ts over or we'll come in and get them !!!!

They said no...............We went in................

By the way I was against the Iraq war as no doubt were many of the loved ones left behind as a result of 9/11............

These threads always attract ignorant types

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:16 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:3,000 people died.............
4.5 billion damage in building destruction..
350 million in civilian aircraft..
1.3 billion in clean up costs......
Air traffic revenue 10 billion...
95 billion lost in taxes..
83,000 job losses
Tens of thousands of people traumatized..............

Catastrophic event............and we are supposed to do NOTHING !!

What did we do.............We asked the TALIBAN to hand the c**ts over or we'll come in and get them !!!!

They said no...............We went in................

By the way I was against the Iraq war as no doubt were many of the loved ones left behind as a result of 9/11............

These threads always attract ignorant types

I wonder how much damage was caused to innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan? Of course, you wouldn't care about that would you.

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:18 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:3,000 people died.............
4.5 billion damage in building destruction..
350 million in civilian aircraft..
1.3 billion in clean up costs......
Air traffic revenue 10 billion...
95 billion lost in taxes..
83,000 job losses
Tens of thousands of people traumatized..............

Catastrophic event............and we are supposed to do NOTHING !!

What did we do.............We asked the TALIBAN to hand the c**ts over or we'll come in and get them !!!!

They said no...............We went in................

By the way I was against the Iraq war as no doubt were many of the loved ones left behind as a result of 9/11............

These threads always attract ignorant types

Deluded

by Scottrf Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:18 am

Alistair wrote:

I wonder how much damage was caused to innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan? Of course, you wouldn't care about that would you.

Straw man after straw man.

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:21 am

Scottrf wrote:
Alistair wrote:

I wonder how much damage was caused to innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan? Of course, you wouldn't care about that would you.
Straw man after straw man.

My argument is they aren't related..........

One was a war another a terroristic act..................

by **seanmichaels** Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:22 am

ShahenshahG wrote:
seanmichaels wrote:Trouble with the Middle east is they'd be having a ruck even if we hadn't got involved. The first Gulf War (Iran v Iraq) claimed 1.5million + lives.

UK and US made Saddam attack iran and supplied him the weapons to do so after their puppet king was toppled. Then when Iran got the upper hand he was supplied with chemical weapons by uk u.s and france which forced the stalemate.

You could argue things were going ok in Iran until 1979. Don't see much progress since then. US Europe showed them the way and they chose to turn their backs on the wealth / civilised society created in favour of a secular state where they lock up kids for re-enacting music videos........

by ONETWOFOREVER Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:22 am

Does anyone really believe the official explanation for the 9-11 attacks presented by the G.W.Bush administration???

Consider the rap sheet of that particular administration before and after the attacks and and use your brain.

by **seanmichaels** Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:23 am

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-29272732

by TRUSSMAN66 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:23 am

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Does anyone really believe the official explanation for the 9-11 attacks presented by the G.W.Bush administration???

Consider the rap sheet of that particular administration before and after the attacks and and use your brain.

Why don't you tell us...........

by Alistair Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:24 am

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
Scottrf wrote:
Alistair wrote:

I wonder how much damage was caused to innocent people in Iraq and Afghanistan? Of course, you wouldn't care about that would you.
Straw man after straw man.

My argument is they aren't related..........

One was a war another a terroristic act..................

They are related, both resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people, only you can only see the American side of the coin.

The terrorist attack was an act of war on America by Al Qaeda.

by Dr Shoe Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:26 am

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Does anyone really believe the official explanation for the 9-11 attacks presented by the G.W.Bush administration???

Consider the rap sheet of that particular administration before and after the attacks and and use your brain.

9/11 tribute controversy Index.php?action=dlattach;topic=42704

by RuggerRadge2611 Tue 15 Sep 2015, 11:27 am

It's not as if coalition forces just marched around the streets killing innocent people. The bulk of the Iraqi deaths were sectarian in nature.

The toppling of Saddam was very messy and not a great deal of thought was put into the aftermath.

Perhaps the United Kingdom of Iraq was the answer. Allow the oil wealth to be shared equally but strong devolved parliaments allowing the Kurds, Sunnis, and Shia muslims to govern themselves as they see fit.

However the removal of Saddam, no matter how messy was the right thing to do. Sure the country was stable but his policy was peace through tyranny as every other ethnic group in Iraq was mercilessly persecuted.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack

Furthermore, on WMDs. It’s my belief that he had them, after all, where do you think he got them in the first place? The weapons were provided by the UK and the US during the war with Iran. History made us allies in the past and we would have known a precise inventory.

by Sponsored content