9/11 Death Sentence?

[phillyburbsmedic]

OK....you have a right to be pissed, and normally I think Shorthair tends to speak without thinking a little too much, but he does make a valid point here. The terrorists did die for a cause they believed in, just as our soldiers are dying for a cause SOME of them believe in. Most of them are just fighting for their lives.

I was in DC on 9/11, witnessed the things that happened there, and it sickens me that people could hate a country I love as much as I do this one enough to want to harm people who had nothing to do with the policies that they take issue with. As a former military member who has lost friends in both Iraq and Afghanistan, I can state that death in battle is nothing glorious, it's death. Period.

Most of the men and women who are fighting and dying "for our country" are not in it because of some grand patriotic belief that separates them from the rest of us. They are in the service, most of them- my guess would be >90% (there are a few who do it for glorious patriotic reasons) simply because its a steady job. Many of them are reservists or guard members who never counted on getting deployed. They aren't fighting for our right to say or do anything- they are fighting for their own survival. They're dying because of the will of an administration who wiping their collective a--es with the Constitution ever since 9/11 and their corporate masters. It's just not acceptable to say the Pvt. Smith and Lt. Jones died in glorious service to Halliburton so it's wrapped up in this BS about how they died trying to free the Iraqi people.

As for the true meaning of honor and sacrifice, and that we would never inflict terrorism upon someone- two words: ABU GHRAIB. Two more: Guantanamo Bay. We've killed civilians by the thousands: Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, Hiroshima. There are countless other cases that can be cited. It doesn't matter whether war has been declared or not. Pure and simple: There is no difference between war and terror. War is terror. Terror is war. Lesson number one: The quickest way to win a war is to kill large numbers of people and break the spirit of those who you don't kill. And nothing will do the latter quicker than the former.

There is nothing honorable about death, there is nothing honorable about killing- no matter the reason. There is nothing honorable about sacrifice for an abstract cause in war, because there are no abstract causes in warfare. There is only survival, minute to minute, hour to hour, day to day. Don't be a bleeding heart....yes we've lost innocents and we've lost brave men who fought valiantly as they were ordered. It doesn't make it hurt any less by pretending they died for "us". Dead is dead. The reason why is inconsequential.

If someone die in battle trying to protect their buddies, you deserve to be commended. That means you did it trying to protect your buddies, not for some right of all Americans.

But back to the main gist of this: Yes, it was wrong what the terrorists did, but I think Shorthair was just trying to point out it took balls to do what they did. And he's right. It did. Not many of us have that kind of dedication to anything, let alone religion or politics. I don't see you lining up to put your butt on the line for the first amendment.

Steve, bravo dude.

[battlemedic345]

Something that SHPunk said sicks with me and I wanted to echo his statement.

Let me first say, I am as American as apple pie, I love this country and of that I have no doubt.

Bill Maher was fired for saying that the hijackers were brave and he was booed and beer bottles were thrown at him, but as repugnant as the act was, and as horrible the thought may be, I have to admit, someone who is willing to unquestionably lay their life down in what they believe is the defense of their way of life...I call that person brave. I didn't say RIGHT. Just brave.

They had a mission they knew they would not be coming back from, but the did it either way because they believed in it.... I hate to admit it, but that is bravery.

Still doesn't make it right......but did I make my point?

On the 20th hijacker: I am not sure what we should do...is he a martyr dead? or a bargaining chip alive? Perhaps we ought to just leave it to his judge to decide.

[medic05~ Bouncer]

Leave it for his judge now THAT will take some faith being as the judicial branch of the government has done such a wonderful job as of late. no offense battlemedic345. I was shipped out when 9/11 happened and helped during the tragedy I still bear the scars but wear them with pride and honor. As far as the 20th hijacker goes I say he needs to be disgraced publicly and torn down to nothing more than a shell of a man. His beliefs have NO place in this country anymore after he committed the act of treason. One thing that everybody seems to forget is that is that okay a swift fair trial yes but an act of treason is punishable by DEATH, PERIOD ,THE END, GAME OVER, this is the way our forefathers set things up. In this day and age everybody is so overly PC it sickens me to see that the Constitution is being trampled upon this is a basic truth. The other problem is that our troops didn't ask to be called up and go fight but they went w/o question to keep our freedoms intact so we could have discussions like these and yet I see people treat them like people treated our Vietnam vets when them came back. Whether or not you agree with why we are over there give our troops the recognition the so richly deserve just think if it was you or your family member over there. And I agree with usafmedic45 there is NO honor is taking a life in war death is death and that image will stay with our troops for the res of their lives. Well I'll get off my soapbox now.

[THE_DITCH_DOCTOR]

I'm guessing your judiciary comments are a result of the Schiavo case? They stood up for the law as it was written, as it was intended. They didn't wipe their a-- with the Constitution. The Congress and Executive branch were the ones who overstepped their bounds. I don't believe in killing, but then again I also don't believe in rewriting the law of the land to needlessly prolong the existence of a person simply because not doing so violates the "moral" standards of those in power (and I use to the term "moral" very loosely when it comes to a lot of politicians on both sides).

People need to remember that our country was not built with the intention of forcing everyone to hold the same beliefs as whomever happens to be in power at that moment, but rather on the ideal that you might have to bite your tongue in order to avoid trampling the rights of the less powerful. We're not a theocracy, despite everything President Bush says, and anyone who believes that we are is deluding themselves.

We're not any better than any other developed country on this planet, and in several ways we are worse because most of us tolerate bigotry and hatred because of religious or social reasons. It's like George Carlin said, "There's a bigot in almost every living room in America. People just will never admit it." I don't see a problem with gay marriage, the right to die, abortion (but only under specific circumstances), etc. But what I do have a problem with is these issues being made out to be the most important thing in our world. I'm sorry, but I think the fact that gas is $2.20 a gallon because of our country's foreign policy ("You mean they're not a Christian democracy? BOMB THEM!") is a little more pressing an issue than if Bob and Joe want to get married. If it's a sin, they'll pay for it later. Leave them the hell alone.

OK....coming down off the soapbox now.

[paramedicmike]

Actually, Moussaoui is a French citizen. He's not a citizen of the US. He can't have committed treason against the US as he's not a US citizen.

As far as his beliefs having no place in our country...

He has the same right to believe what he wants as do you. Does he have the right to kill people over it? Not any more than you do. But he can still believe it.

Lastly, our troops went to fight because they were ordered to do so. I'm sure that many in the aftermath of 9/11 wanted to go. Many others, unsure of the motives, didn't want to. But they went because they ordered to do so. Sweeping generalizations don't do any of us any good.

Other than that, Steve has voiced a logical, well thought and presented argument. Gonna have to stand behind and support what he said.

Be safe.

[Richard B the EMT]

OK, even the dictionary definitions of Treason are hazy, as I was going to put one of them onto this string.

So he's a French citizen. We've tried foreign nationals before, in both civilian courts, and military tribunals.

If I understand what I read (subject to further reading for a correct answer, if this is incorrect), doing an act to overthrow or disable the functions of a government of a country, either by a native, or a foreigner, that individual is committing treason against that country. If a foreigner, more likely the individual could probably also be tried as a spy, as well as the native.

[kristo]

This is an extremely interesting thread. I couldn't agree more with what Steve posted. War and terrorism is the exactly same thing. The ONLY difference between the USA and Al Queada is PR. The USA have the media on their side. The methods are exactly the same.

As for international trials, it is clearly illegal for anyone to invade another country and judge the people there. Period. It would always be an illegal court.

There are international courts, made for situations like this - only, the USA has specifically stated that they will not recognise them unless the rules will be changed so US citizens are not subject to those courts. So, not going to happen.

[battlemedic345]

I would wholeheartedly disagree that the methods are the same. I have never seen an American soldier saw the head off a prisoner ....

[THE_DITCH_DOCTOR]

But then again, we'd "never seen" soldiers act like the people at Abu Ghraib- just because you didn't see it, doesn't mean it doesn't happen. Viet Nam vets I know will admit to cutting the ears off of people they suspected of working with the enemy as a way of marking them. So much for the righteous and noble liberators huh? I don't believe that suddenly in this war we've spawned an entire group of mindless, uncaring "evil" soldiers- it's just that the stuff that has ALWAYS happened on every side during war time has been able to be publicized and not suppressed by the powers that be. The Romans engaged in terror (Hell, they practically perfected it), the Visigoths did it, the Huns did it, the French did it (to their own people of course), the English did it on a few occasions, the Catholic Church has done it numerous times, the current elder German generation is notorious for it, so why should be we be viewed as somehow better than every other group that has ever existed? Oh, wait, I know- because we're Americans. :roll:

[battlemedic345]

The statement that the only difference between the US and AQ is "PR" is a gross over-statement and is simply not correct. The two countries/govt's may have SOME similarities, but thats it.... there isn't only ONE difference between the two.

I usually think Faux-Patriotism is disgusting...I think people who stick "God Bless America" stickers on their bumpers are corny, but in this case I must say I was truly offended by someone's comments about my country.

I am going to stop typing now before I say something I will regret.