9/11 More Justified Than War in Iraq?, Food for Thought Options

[Simba]

Could it be possible that the 9/11 bombings be more "justifiable" than America's war in Iraq?

And later, other possibly "justified" killings.

[kimmytree]

Hmm, I'm not sure if I understand the question. Are you asking if 9/11 was a good enough reason for us to go to Iraq? Or?

Lol sorry.
Very interesting topic though!

[Simba]

Sorry about the vagueness. In a sense, I'm asking, "Which was more justified, the 9/11 bombings or the war in Iraq?"

[kimmytree]

Eeeek. I'm still a little confused, but its my fault. I'm so sleepy.

So you mean, did the terrorists have a better reason for 9/11 than we do for going to Iraq? Ahh I'm sorry. My brain's fried today.

[Simba]

Yup, that's what I meant to discuss.

[kimmytree]

Well, first off, I dont feel like we should have ever gone into Iraq. Bin Ladden and terrorists had very little to do with Saddam and Iraq. Plus, we jumped in with false information, and went in before letting the UN finish their inspections... probably because we knew that they wouldnt find anything, which would give less of an excuse to go in. And we broke international law.

I think I kinda understand why the terrorists did what they did. It's their religion... they believe the more people they kill, the greater their reward in Heaven. They were just working for salvation, not wanting to end up in a bad place. But that still doesnt justify what they did.

Hmm I think they're equal. Both very different, but I think its hard to decide on one.

[NoSex]

Given our betrayal of Osama Bin Ladden, our dogmatic support of an Israeli state, and our other innumerable offenses towards and within the middle east, I would say that 9/11 was, at the very least, bound to happen. Certainly more justifiable than a war in Iraq. Definitely.

[*I Viddy Horrorshow*]

An attack against the US was possibly justified in borad terms, but an assault which deliberately targetted and murdered civilians was most certainly not.

That said, neither was the war with Iraq.

I say two wrongs, without a lot of right to aportion to one or the other.

[Simba]

Alright, so maybe 9/11 was more justified than the war in Iraq.

I would say the 9/11 bombings were actually more justified than the war in Iraq, had their vision that it is "justified by God/Allah" had been bona fide. The Muslim's behind 9/11 believed that they were killing for God. Whether this bombing really was permitted by "God," who knows?

America's only reason for going into Iraq, when it comes down to it, is probably just for resources such as oil. Iraq wasn't even involved in the 9/11 bombings and weapons of mass destruction were never found there, yet we're still there.

Anyway, now I come to the real topic I wanted to discuss, justified killings in the name of God. Basically, some scriptures state that if God told you to kill, and you did indeed kill, you would receive no negative effects (i.e. go to "Hell," receive bad karma, etc.). Opinions?

[AngelinaTaylor]

Alright, so maybe 9/11 was more justified than the war in Iraq.

I would say the 9/11 bombings were actually more justified than the war in Iraq, had their vision that it is "justified by God/Allah" had been bona fide. The Muslim's behind 9/11 believed that they were killing for God. Whether this bombing really was permitted by "God," who knows?

America's only reason for going into Iraq, when it comes down to it, is probably just for resources such as oil. Iraq wasn't even involved in the 9/11 bombings and weapons of mass destruction were never found there, yet we're still there.

Anyway, now I come to the real topic I wanted to discuss, justified killings in the name of God. Basically, some scriptures state that if God told you to kill, and you did indeed kill, you would receive no negative effects (i.e. go to "Hell," receive bad karma, etc.). Opinions?

America claimed it invaded Iraq because 1. Iraq supposedly had weapons of mass destruction, and 2. to "remove a brutal dictator". The latter was claimed AFTER it became evident Iraq didn't have any weapons of mass destruction. Is that justified? I don't think so. Now the only reason they're there is to prevent mass killings. Which isn't working out so well, considering the fact that more people are now dying than the time of Hussein.

9/11 wasn't justified either. A lot of innocent people died, and no life is ever more valuable than another - they're human lives. Religion is a bullshit reason to kill somebody, period. You're doing it for your own selfish reason. Although what can you do to stop somebody who has nothing to lose?

Breaking international law isn't really a big deal, because countries aren't technically required to follow it - it's all voluntary.