9/11: Unfinished

September 11, 2011 | Filed under 9/11 | Posted by

 

 

I’ve never been a big fan of anniversaries for bad days.  Mostly because there is so much insincerity; dozens of media people trot out false sorrow and sympathy on camera, then return to a life filled with self-indulgence and narcissism.  The same, unfortunately, can also be said for most of our elected officials.  What makes today worse is that so many of these people miss at least part of the message.  Some will miss it completely, as we hear from apologists and America-haters, who are best ignored for this article.  But what I mean for here, is that we will hear about the victims (as we should), the heroism of Flight 93’s passengers and the first responders (again, quite right), tinged with the sub-rosa hints that no one should be blamed for what so many call “tragedy”, rather than face the truth.

 

The truth is, ten years ago today theUnited Stateswas suddenly and viciously attacked by members of an evil cult, which continues to exist and which enjoys support, but overt and tacit, for its mission againstAmerica, her citizens and values.  While many of this cult have been hunted down and killed, there remains a vital mission to exterminate not only Al Qaeda, but every similar group and their supporters.  This imperative is apolitical, permanent, and indisputable, although we can assume safely that there are plenty of Nimrods who will play politics with the issue, try to pretend this is history rather than a present danger, and play the denial card past its limit. 

 

We were and are right to hunt down the terrorists in their homes.  While it may not be necessary to invade and occupy foreign lands, it is and will be for the foreseeable future necessary, for the security of all Americans, to find terrorist groups and exterminate them.  Al Qaeda deliberately targeted thousands of innocent men, women, and children (there were two daycares in theWorldTradeCenter, for example).  That crosses a line which cannot be ignored, and the message must be loud, clear, and unified:

 

When you target innocent Americans on U.S. soil, you forfeit everything you have and are.

 

We will find you, we will kill you, and this will not end as long as your group exists. 

 

Remember.  Remember who did this, and what needs to be done.  There is no moral equivalency, no need to ‘try to understand’ terrorists, no reason to forgive.

« « “I had never heard my mom so genuinely scared” (UPDATED)
9/11: Ten Years Later – 8:46AM » »

Shortlink:

Posted by on September 11, 2011.
Filed under 9/11.
DJ Drummond holds an MBA with a concentration in Accounting, and has worked in Finance/Credit for 13 years, with 17 years of Operations Management experience before that. He writes on political, religious, and cancer-related issues, with the occasional foray into satire and snark.

You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
  • Anonymous

    Never forgive.  Never forget.

  • herddog505

    DJ Drummond – We will find you, we will kill you, and this will not end as long as your group exists. 

    Areed.  And I also suggest an addition:

    And if you help these animals, if you give them shelter, aid, training, money, supplies, or even encouragement, go ahead and make your will and make your peace with your god, because you’re on the list, too.

  • Anonymous

    I agree that it’s “unfinished,” in that Al Zawahiri and a few others involved in 9/11 are still alive.  They should and can be hunted down by the CIA and Special Operations Forces.

    But do you mean we haven’t got enough troops killed and spent enough money?    Going on 6500 troops and three trillion dollars.   Hasn’t America been weakened enough? 

    And hell, we’ve only killed about  two or three hundred ”thousands of innocent men, women, and children,” (in your phrase), in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan since 9/11.  How many relatives of theirs will be looking for what they see as justified vengeance in the decades to come? 

    We could have installed the better cockpit doors, increased security and airports and visa screening, and used the CIA and Special Operations Forces to hunt down Al Qaeda the way the Mossad hunted down the PLO guys who killed the Israeli athletes in Munich.  Instead, we went on our own jihad against Afghanistan and Iraq, legalized torture and trashed the sacred Constitution.

    It really is more like this –

    The Vengeance of Osama Bin Laden

    Paris, September 6, 2011 – Ten years on, Osama bin
    Laden, were he not at
    the bottom of the sea, could be reasonably
    satisfied with what he has
    accomplished with the 9/11 attacks.
    He meant to deliver a blow to the
    American economy. Thanks to the
    catastrophic cost of the Bush
    administration’s retaliatory wars
    in Afghanistan and Iraq, he was vastly
    more successful than
    he could rationally have expected. . . .

    http://www.williampfaff.com/modules/news/article.php?storyid=536

    • jim_m

      Hasn’t America been weakened enough?

      If America has been weakened it is not because there have been military defeats.  Our military has demonstrated that it is capable of seeking out and destroying the enemy in any theater of combat.

      No, if we are weakened it is because our political leadership has made it so.  Vacillating politicians who unreasonably desire war to be some comfortable and bloodless activity, when it is exactly the opposite, have failed to muster the resolve to see the conflict through to a resolution.  Leftists who seek to weaken the US and who seek the degradation of this nation and its influence have succeeded in further sapping the resolve of an incompetent political class.

      I must say that America is not weakened, but its political leadership has been exposed as singularly unworthy of the nation they claim to lead.

      • Anonymous

        If America has been weakened it is not because there have been military defeats.

        Agreed, but I know you are familar with the term “Pyrrhic victory.”   For example, say we “won” in Iraq.  Won what?   

        Other than that, I don’t know what you mean – the wars have only been comfortable, bloodless, and cheap to Americans lounging at home in the USA, not to the troops or the inhabitants of the countries where war has been waged.

        When you’ve lost good troops, many maimed for life to survive as a continuing lesson to the nation, expended equipment (example: how many Blackhawk engines?), burned up money, starved the Navy, and degraded training readiness for many non-counterinsurgency combat skills and lost your soft-power reputation for competence (Fiasco), credibility (WMD) and decency you’re weaker.
          

        • jim_m

          I think you understood me correctly.  War is never comfortable, clean or bloodless for the troops.  But he political class want it to appear so.  obama doesn’t even use the term war, it’s “Kinetic military action”.  What bullshit.  War sucks. People are maimed and killed.  If we are going to do it then do it 100%, don’t hold back, and use every reasonable means to achieve a complete victory as swiftly as possible.  That means none of these stupid rules of engagement that put our troops at risk.  Yes innocents die in a war.  It’s unavoidable, but if it is war then I stand for protecting our troops first instead of sacrificing them in the battlefield on the alter of political correctness.

          As to what we finally won in Iraq:  We destroyed Saddam Hussein and his murderous regime.  We installed a new democratically elected government.  Whether the weak kneed policies of our govnerment has managed to preserve the hard won victory that our troops gave us is another issue. 

          The fact that our politicians may have wasted the victory achieved is not an excuse to say that we should have not fought the war or that we shouldn’t fight wars.  No, it is an argument for ensuring that we elect people who have the intelligence and will to do what is right.  We spend too much time talking about who looks presidential and too many people vote for someone like obama because he seems cool.  

          I’d rather we elected a fat man like Churchill or an ugly man like Lincoln or a toothless man like Washington; any one of whom could lead this country better than it is currently and none of whom could ever hope to be elected today for reasons of physical appearance alone.

        • Anonymous

          You tout a “democratically elected government.”   That government is strongly aligned to Iran. It may preserve its formal independence, but is not going to follow U.S. policy in the region, especially on Israel-Palestine.  It is not going to even give the U.S. any commercial advantage.  And remember, Saddam was our buddy up to 1990.

          As far as Rule of Engagement go, lack of fire discipline does not win counterinsurgencies.   Yeah, you can “win” the war by killing everyone in the country, but that’s not supposed to be the USA’s style, is it?   A warrior does not machine gun a car with a family because he feels slight anxiety – he takes some risk to try to save innocents.  That’s why Gen. McChrystal gave awards for restraint under pressure.  Blackwater killing innocent civilians in Iraq caused huge damage to the mission there.

    • Anonymous

      “And hell, we’ve only killed about  two or three hundred ”thousands of innocent men, women, and children,” (in your phrase), in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan since 9/11.”

      I can only imagine where you picked up that tidbit of information.  Have another pitcher of Kool Aid.  Unfortunately innocents do die in wars.  But there is ONE HELL OF A DIFFERENCE between an ACCIDENT and DELIBERATE targeting.

      • jim_m

        Last week the leftist medical journal The Lancet revised downward their obscene death estimates in Iraq from 655,000 to 108,000.  http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/corrupt-leftists-at-lancet-now-say-108000-iraqis-were-killed-in-war-not-655000/

        Leftist lies have filled the media for a decade in an attempt to shame the US for defending itself.  Now when no one is looking they try to edit the record so they don’t look like the frauds that they really are.

      • jim_m

        Last week the leftist medical journal The Lancet revised downward their obscene death estimates in Iraq from 655,000 to 108,000.  http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2011/09/corrupt-leftists-at-lancet-now-say-108000-iraqis-were-killed-in-war-not-655000/

        Leftist lies have filled the media for a decade in an attempt to shame the US for defending itself.  Now when no one is looking they try to edit the record so they don’t look like the frauds that they really are.

      • Anonymous

        OK so we only caused the deaths of 108,000 or so in Iraq, and how many in Afghanistan?  Seems like every week there’s a “Whoops, we bombed a wedding party instead of the Taliban” story. 

        When you invade a country, that’s a deliberate act from which the deaths of thousands of innocents follow.  Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, yet thousands of Iraqi children have died since March 2003.  Remember that Wikileaks video in Iraq where the van of the guy who stopped to do first aid was shot up?   I’d say we gave them “payback” – in spades.  Even though Saudi Arabia had a hundred times more to do with 9/11 than Iraq.  But the Saudi royalty were buddies with Bush and our oligarchy, so they got a pass.

        • jim_m

          Mass graves found following the war suggest that the total number of Kurds, Shia, and other Iraqi dissidents killed is over 300,000 in Hussein’s purges.  Estimates are the 500,000 Iraqi children died during the implementation of economic sanctions as Hussein starved his population.

          Don’t go crying to me that we caused too many civilian casualties.  More people survive a year in Iraq today because we went in there than did beforehand.  This is pure bullshit to say that we killed more innocents than would have been killed if we hadn’t gone in.

      • Anonymous

        He likes his koolada warm…

    • jim_m

      Thanks to the catastrophic cost of the Bush
      administration’s retaliatory wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, he was vastly more successful than
      he could rationally have expected. . . .

      And it is ridiculous in the extreme to blame our current economic woes on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Deficits under Bush were higher but still a manageable percentage of GDP. 

      The damage has been done not by Bush or the wars but by years of government regulations that set up the financial and mortgage markets for failure. 

      The damage has been worsened by hamfisted attempts by politicians who have never worked a single day in a real job to solve business issues by piling vast sums of money into the corporate sinkholes of GM, Chrysler, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and assorted Banks.

      The damage has been done by a leftist obama administration that heaps unnecessary legislation on industries it dislikes and works to pick winners and losers in the marketplace based on who makes the proper political contributions.  Companies like Solyndra and others get massive public support.  Companies like power utilities, coal mines, oil refiners, Ford, Gibson Guitar are opposed, obstructed and harassed.

      The cost of the wars could have been lessened by an administration that would have had the courage to let loose the dogs of war and to win those wars in the most swift and efficient ways possible.  Unfortunately, the political class was too weak and the MSM shamed them into hesitation and half measures.

      While we did spend billions on Iraq and Afghanistan, obama has increased the the annual deficit to over $1.3 T per year for the last 3 years. The deficit in the final year of the Bush Admin was a mere $400B by comparison.  To blame the wars for our economic conditions is ignorant in the extreme and can only be made by those who are either ignorant of history and the facts or willfully ignoring those facts in order to make a political argument at the expense of our nation.

      • Anonymous

        Rumsfeld wanted to fight the wars on the cheap and fought the generals, who knew better. 

        The wars significantly added to the deficit over both Bush’s and Obama’s terms.  If you think the national debt is a problem, a big part of the reason is there.

        • jim_m

          How much of obama’s 1.6T deficit this year is from the wars?  A couple of billion at the very most.  The vast majority of the spending is on corruption and graft and worthless crap like Solyndra as well as a huge expansion of federal timeservers.

          Only someone who pays no attention to what is being spent could say that the wars are a significant contribution to the debt.

          Other than that, your Rumsfeld comment is exactly what I meant. 

          • https://plus.google.com/114041580398058374552/posts McGehee

            There’s actually a graph that shows what proportion of several years’ budgets are for the wars. We could almost save more money by having the entire government switch to a cheaper brand of sticky notes.

          • Bob Armstrong

            Here’s your sign… moron. Read it and weep.

          • Bob Armstrong

            see graphic

        • Anonymous

          The war in Iraq came after 9/11.  If there had been no attack on 9/11, it is doubtful there ever would have been a war in Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. 

          Significantly added, well hell there’s a phrase.  10% is significant, but that’s not the main problem.

          I am no champion of the invasion of Iraq.  But I won’t use that to explain the economic woes of our country’s budget.  How much we spend on sugar subsidies, corn subsidies, etc. is not as much but certainly more significant.  The long term dependence upon government has distorted our agriculture industry.  How much we’ve spent on propping up the bankrupt companies that unions have made noncompetitive?  Again our economy distorted and no longer a competitive strength in the world economy.  Our budget woes are linked to unbridled domestic spending AND the shackling of our economy (which if going full tilt would greatly increase government revenue more than any tax increase on the rich, poor and middle class could ever accomplish).
           

    • jim_m

      Thanks to the catastrophic cost of the Bush
      administration’s retaliatory wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, he was vastly more successful than
      he could rationally have expected. . . .

      And it is ridiculous in the extreme to blame our current economic woes on the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.  Deficits under Bush were higher but still a manageable percentage of GDP. 

      The damage has been done not by Bush or the wars but by years of government regulations that set up the financial and mortgage markets for failure. 

      The damage has been worsened by hamfisted attempts by politicians who have never worked a single day in a real job to solve business issues by piling vast sums of money into the corporate sinkholes of GM, Chrysler, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and assorted Banks.

      The damage has been done by a leftist obama administration that heaps unnecessary legislation on industries it dislikes and works to pick winners and losers in the marketplace based on who makes the proper political contributions.  Companies like Solyndra and others get massive public support.  Companies like power utilities, coal mines, oil refiners, Ford, Gibson Guitar are opposed, obstructed and harassed.

      The cost of the wars could have been lessened by an administration that would have had the courage to let loose the dogs of war and to win those wars in the most swift and efficient ways possible.  Unfortunately, the political class was too weak and the MSM shamed them into hesitation and half measures.

      While we did spend billions on Iraq and Afghanistan, obama has increased the the annual deficit to over $1.3 T per year for the last 3 years. The deficit in the final year of the Bush Admin was a mere $400B by comparison.  To blame the wars for our economic conditions is ignorant in the extreme and can only be made by those who are either ignorant of history and the facts or willfully ignoring those facts in order to make a political argument at the expense of our nation.

  • https://plus.google.com/114041580398058374552/posts McGehee

    9/11/01:

    You have unleashed forces beyond your ken. You have engaged us in a war where our only defense is your annihilation. Having sown the wind, now reap the whirlwind.

    Let everyone else take caution, and stay out of the way.