On 15th anniversary of 9/11, 'the grief never goes away'

Many Americans died in the towers attack by Saudi suicide bombers. Then Republican President GW Bush used that as an excuse to invade Iraq which led to hundreds of thousands of deaths and the present disastrous fighting going on now in Islamic countries. The first responders and the troops that he sent to die and be injured were indeed brave Americans. But the invasion was itself an evil aggression and we must never again use U.S. military might so carelessly.

The NYC firefighters and police officers shone that day. Such fine and brave people.

RIP

May they rest in peace.

Nearly 3,000 people died when hijacked planes slammed into the World Trade Center

A few of them undoubtedly did, but most of them died when the demolition bombs went off.

Isn't it time there was a REAL investigation into the most despicable social crime imaginable?

Moderator: Please do not bring your obsession with conspiracy theories to this discussion.

Then Republican President GW Bush used that as an excuse to invade Iraq which led to hundreds of thousands of deaths and the present disastrous fighting going on now in Islamic countries.

Kinda cheap for the left on this tragic day to politicize a terrible tragedy like this, I wouldn't expect less from liberals. Remember, we have been having a problem with radical Islam befor 9/11 and if you really want to blame someone and not be a partisan, blame Bubba for not taking the initiative to have the shot called that would have ended OBL life. Had he done that, The Iraq invasion wouldn't have existed.

The first responders and the troops that he sent to die and be injured were indeed brave Americans. But the invasion was itself an evil aggression and we must never again use U.S. military might so carelessly.

That depends on who you are asking, but definitely from 1998 until the present a lot of mistakes were made, No doubt about it.

Oh, it's kinda cheap to bring politics to 9/11? Someone should have told that to Trump before he went on record calling One World Trade Center 'disgusting' and 'a piece of junk', or talking about one benefit of 9/11 was to make the 71 story building he owns at 40 Wall Street the tallest in Manhattan! Easy GOP answer will be he was speaking as a businessperson, not as a politician, so all is forgiven.

bass4funkSEP. 12, 2016 - 09:43AM JST Kinda cheap for the left on this tragic day to politicize a terrible tragedy like this, I wouldn't expect less from liberals. Remember, we have been having a problem with radical Islam befor 9/11 and if you really want to blame someone and not be a partisan, blame Bubba

So you condemn "liberals" collectively for this one post politicizing 9/11, and then turn around and do the exact same thing. Makes a lot of sense.

Getting to the article, I'd venture that a big part of the reason so many people have trouble moving on from 9/11 is the vast number of people who never personally experienced any tragedy from the 9/11 attacks, either by cynically exploiting it for political gain as you criticized and then did yourself, or by parasitically leeching off of the suffering of genuine victims as an expression of patriotism. People who genuinely need healing and respite from grief every year get thrust back into their trauma by hundreds of media organizations playing maudlin tributes to 9/11 in order to boost ratings.

Let the people who genuinely experienced a loss have their time to deal with their loss in dignity, and the rest of us should stop exploiting their pain for our own psychological benefit.

I read an interesting article that basically said Al Queda had a tactical but not a strategic victory that day.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/09/08/opinions/september-11-al-qaeda-spectacular-miscalculation-bergen/index.html

They thought they would be safe from America in Afghanistan. Four months later, they were running for the hills, and in the 15 years since 9/11 America Al Queda is nearly ineffectual. The goals of 9/11 was to push America out of Saudi Arabia and to push them out of the middle east. They failed in an extreme way.

In addition, since that day, there have been around 40 people killed in the U.S. by Al Queda and ISIS. Tragic as those deaths are, Al Queda (and ISIS) has been mostly ineffective in meeting its goals and to bring war to the U.S.

The place where America has failed is in providing health care to the first responders to 9/11. The government has failed them.

Kinda cheap for the left on this tragic day to politicize a terrible tragedy like this

We didn't, Bush did when he linked his invasion of Iraq to 9-11. Your anger is misplaced, this one is on the Republicans.

"Kinda cheap for the left on this tragic day to politicize a terrible tragedy like this, I wouldn't expect less from liberals."

Didn't Trump claim to have seen large numbers of Muslims celebrating this event in New York?

@Katsu78

Spot on. This has become a photo-op for politicians and chest-thumping 'patriots'. Not very dignified.

So you condemn "liberals" collectively for this one post politicizing 9/11, and then turn around and do the exact same thing. Makes a lot of sense.

Yes, after the libs started that same old diatribe with their Bush syndrome crap. I understand the vitriol the left have for Bush, but can you guys once put it aside for this one day and if not, then at least before calling the kettle black, go back to 1998 when Bubba took it upon himself NOT to end OBL life.

Getting to the article, I'd venture that a big part of the reason so many people have trouble moving on from 9/11 is the vast number of people who never personally experienced any tragedy from the 9/11 attacks, either by cynically exploiting it for political gain as you criticized and then did yourself, or by parasitically leeching off of the suffering of genuine victims as an expression of patriotism.

It's amazing to me, how the left portray themselves as deep concerned people about the men and women that died when most of them wouldn't even think about enlisting in the armed forces. Hypocrites!

People who genuinely need healing and respite from grief every year get thrust back into their trauma by hundreds of media organizations playing maudlin tributes to 9/11 in order to boost ratings.

So you're one of the liberals that think, we should just do away with the ceremonies, forget about it and just move on as if nothing happened? I know you guys hate religion and holidays any semblance of traditional and cultural traits that bind us all together as a nation.

Let the people who genuinely experienced a loss have their time to deal with their loss in dignity, and the rest of us should stop exploiting their pain for our own psychological benefit.

If the families didn't want the services to be held, they would have protested already, they haven't. Do you feel the same about the Holocaust? Should Jews not commemorate any of their sufferings? Or how about Blacks, should they also just forget about the pain and suffering that were inflicted upon them during slavery?

Ah, putting down people who don't enlist? How many brave soldiers came from the Trump brood? Obviously zero. What a hero!

bass4funkSEP. 12, 2016 - 10:41AM JST Yes, after the libs started that same old diatribe with their Bush syndrome crap.

"the libs"? You mean one poster. One poster said one thing you disagreed with and you decided that made it time to throw everyone who genuinely suffered from 9/11 under a bus just so you could score internet points through your feud with everyone who doesn't think what you think.

I'm not saying this as a political rival, I'm saying this as a person who sees another person in trouble. Take a day off. Take one day and post nothing political whatsoever. Please, for your own mental health. Walk away from this constructed conflict and find something to give you some peace and happiness in the real world. Please.

Moderator: It is you who is in trouble. If you ever post rubbish like this again, you will be leaving us. You owe the poster an apology.

It's amazing to me, how the left portray themselves as deep concerned people about the men and women that died when most of them wouldn't even think about enlisting in the armed forces. Hypocrites!

Enlistment is empathy. Soldiering is sympathy. Avenge, avenge, avenge!

Bubba took it upon himself NOT to end OBL life.

Nice try, typical falsehoods espoused by Fox TV and repeated by the right.

Bubba did nearly everything short of invading Afghanistan to kill OBL. He took every chance available to kill him and worked hard to do so. The record is clear. I am sure Bush tried too, and he had the benefit of an invasion force and still failed.

"It's amazing to me, how the left portray themselves as deep concerned people about the men and women that died when most of them wouldn't even think about enlisting in the armed forces. Hypocrites!"

My idea of being concerned about people would include not sending them to be killed in pointless wars.

Nice try, typical falsehoods espoused by Fox TV and repeated by the right.

Falsehoods?? I guess liberals can't dig deeper enough. This has nothing to do with FOX and everything with Clinton coming clean and being honest for once in a rare occasion.

https://youtu.be/QBtPAaRLnik

Bubba did nearly everything short of invading Afghanistan to kill OBL. He took every chance available to kill him and worked hard to do so.

But the bottom line, he didn't. Before there was a Bush admin. It was Bill Clinton and HE HAD THE CHANCE to take action to have his life ended, but didn't, NOT missed or failed attempt, he chose NOT to kill him.

The record is clear. I am sure Bush tried too, and he had the benefit of an invasion force and still failed.

As I say, if people want to quibble about him going into Iraq, that's debatable argument, but when it comes to killing OBL, Bubba should have ended his life, but he made the decision not to and that's on him.

Who is this "Bubba" you are ranting on about? People would take you more seriously if you made sense and wrote posts that are understandable.

Either do the news stories and yearly updates...

I wonder when all the other victims of this "war on terror" are going to be remembered?

Let's just table the politics for the rest of this thread. There are plenty of other ones where we can have the exact same debate.

It was Bill Clinton and HE HAD THE CHANCE to take action to have his life ended, but didn't, NOT missed or failed attempt, he chose NOT to kill him.

Some have a quite faulty memory of history. Clinton went all-out in his attempts to disrupt al Qaeda and kill bin Laden, and the result was Republican criticism that Clinton was trying to distract from the Lewinsky scandal - a "wag the dog" thing. Here, Bass - this might refresh that sieve that you call "memory." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach#Aftermath

In addition, the outgoing Clinton administration spared no effort in trying to warn the incoming Bush administration of the threat al Qaeda posed, but the Bush administration was uninterested; they were already focused on Iraq. This Politco piece is a must-read to understand the breathtaking negligence of the Bush administration. http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/11/cia-directors-documentary-911-bush-213353

9/11 was a terrible tragedy and might have been unstoppable even if Bush had taken Clinton's advisers' advice to go on a war footing. To blame Clinton and absolve Bush, though, will result in learning nothing from history.

Kinda cheap for the left on this tragic day to politicize a terrible tragedy like this, I wouldn't expect less from liberals.

bass4funk: So it's not good for liberals to politicize it, but alright for Republicans to? Trump has been using 9/11 for his campaign from the beginning, with lies and fabrications like his claims that he saw thousands of people in New York cheering the disaster, to claims that he personally witnessed people from his Trump Tower in New Jersey. He also claimed that he lost hundreds of friends in the disaster. So are you actually saying Trump's lies are alright?

It was Bill Clinton and HE HAD THE CHANCE to take action to have his life ended, but didn't, NOT missed or failed attempt, he chose NOT to kill him.

Although it is in the clip you provided, it is not really fair not to state why he chose not to kill him. Clinton did not want the blood of 300 innocent lives on his hands. 20/20 hindsight aside, listening to him, I can perfectly understand his decision and why he would have made it. Would that more leaders think like that and the world would be a better place.

Some have a quite faulty memory of history. Clinton went all-out in his attempts to disrupt al Qaeda and kill bin Laden, and the result was Republican criticism that Clinton was trying to distract from the Lewinsky scandal - a "wag the dog" thing.

Dude, you don't need to sound like a typical liberal trying to come up with excuses, the simple and bottomline is, Bill Clinton made the decision NOT to kill OBL, pure and simple and that was his call. There is nothing to argue or debate, he didn't take the initiative. You can't defend the indefensible when Dems and libs do it, it makes them look desperate and childish. There should be no shame in accepting accountability for what happened and Bill to a tad degree was remorseful.

9/11 was a terrible tragedy and might have been unstoppable even if Bush had taken Clinton's advisers' advice to go on a war footing. To blame Clinton and absolve Bush, though, will result in learning nothing from history.

We weren't attacked after that, Bush kept us safe, he created Homeland security, merging the FBI and CIA to share vital intel between both agencies and hadn't been attacked for the remainder of his admin. The same could be said about the Bush admin. advising Obama to keep a sizable amount of troops and a SOFA agreement in place and Obama didn't, he was handled a stable Iraq. Biden was on Larry King saying Iraq would be the greatest victory achievement of the Obama presidency and then further not listening to his senior commanders, we now have ISIS. Obama can't come around to define who the enemy is and won't.

So are you actually saying Trump's lies are alright?

Not at all.

Normally I don't parley with you, Bass, but your understanding of recent history is seriously flawed. For example:

...he didn't take the initiative.

Oh, but he did - and was both criticized by the GOP for it and ignored by the succeeding administration. See my above post.

We weren't attacked after that, Bush kept us safe...

Wrong. Excluding 9/11 (and that is a very large exclusion), the number of small-scale terrorist attacks under Bush was actually larger than under Obama.

Bush admin. advising Obama to keep a sizable amount of troops and a SOFA agreement in place and Obama didn't...

Obama executed the withdrawal agreement that the Bush administration had negotiated to the letter - nothing added, nothing subtracted. Perhaps there was some "secret" advice from Bush either to ignore his own agreement or to violate it; if you have any info on that, please let the world know so that you can win a Pulitzer.

Your opinions are your own, but facts matter, particularly regarding recent history, in which the repercussions are still being felt. Bush failed. He failed to protect America despite warnings from Clinton; he failed to secure swift and just retribution from those responsible, instead getting the US bogged down in an unwinnable war in Iraq; and he failed to hand over to Obama a stable situation, neither geopolitically nor economically. This is not my opinion; facts bear this out. Trump would return America to the same people who gave us Bush. That is not a chance the world can take.

Normally I don't parley with you, Bass, but your understanding of recent history is seriously flawed. For example:

Actually, it's not, but go on....

Oh, but he did - and was both criticized by the GOP for it and ignored by the succeeding administration. See my above post.

I'm sorry, maybe you didn't realize that OBL was able to send mostly Saudi plane hijackers to destroy the Twin Towers. Good lord, man! In 1998 Bill Jefferson Clinton was the president of the USA, the man had the opportunity to kill OBL and didn't do it, please stop contorting history as if we're at a Cirque Du Soleil show.

Wrong. Excluding 9/11 (and that is a very large exclusion), the number of small-scale terrorist attacks under Bush was actually larger than under Obama.

How many terrorist attacks did we have under Bush after 9/11 involving radical jihadists? Please tell me exactly. Go ahead, I'm waiting....

Obama executed the withdrawal agreement that the Bush administration had negotiated to the letter - nothing added, nothing subtracted. Perhaps there was some "secret" advice from Bush either to ignore his own agreement or to violate it; if you have any info on that, please let the world know so that you can win a Pulitzer.

The withdrawal agreement was already in place and the wind down was started by the Bush administration before Obama was even on the scene.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/all-us-troops-to-leave-iraq/2011/10/21/gIQAUyJi3L_story.html

In a Friday morning video conference, Obama and Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki agreed to a complete U.S. military departure that will fulfill a promise important to Obama’s reelection effort. The decision drew sharp criticism from his Republican rivals, as well as expressions of relieved support from those who believe it is time for the United States to conclude a war Obama once called “dumb.”

For months, U.S. and Iraqi officials had been negotiating the terms of an accord that would have kept several thousand U.S. troops in Iraq for special operations and training beyond the year-end deadline set by the George W. Bush administration.

But Obama and Maliki, who have never developed much personal chemistry, failed to reach agreement on the legal status of U.S. troops who would stay in Iraq beyond Dec. 31. As a result, only a contingent of fewer than 200 Marines assigned to help protect the large U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad will remain, along with a small number of other personnel to provide training related to new military sales and other tasks.

That was the beginning of the end of Iraq when all Obama had to do was keep a larger residual force and he didn't. We all know what came next on his watch.

Your opinions are your own, but facts matter,

That's why I laid them out, it doesn't matter how I think

particularly regarding recent history, in which the repercussions are still being felt. Bush failed. He failed to protect America despite warnings from Clinton;

And if Clinton would have allowed that shot to be taken, 9/11woudlnt have happened and Iraq wouldn't have happened, bottom line.

he failed to secure swift and just retribution from those responsible, instead getting the US bogged down in an unwinnable war in Iraq; and he failed to hand over to Obama a stable situation, neither geopolitically nor economically. This is not my opinion; facts bear this out. Trump would return America to the same people who gave us Bush. That is not a chance the world can take.

I know liberals love to create a beautiful utopian of inflated realities and the Unicornverse, but even I'm shocked hearing this. That's like saying the US never reached the moon, let alone walk on it.

Wikipedia notes that Obama followed to the letter the agreement that George W. Bush had reached with the Iraqi government:

The Bush Administration later sought an agreement with the Iraqi government, and in 2008 George W. Bush signed the U.S.–Iraq Status of Forces Agreement. It included a deadline of 31 December 2011, before which "all the United States Forces shall withdraw from all Iraqi territory". The last U.S. troops left Iraq on 18 December 2011, in accordance with this agreement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Withdrawal_of_U.S._troops_from_Iraq

The Heritage Foundation - a very conservative group - notes that the number of attacks both successful and disrupted have remained roughly steady under both Bush and Obama, though the number of deaths that occurred under Bush were far larger - though roughly equal if 9/11 is ignored.

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2013/07/60-terrorist-plots-since-911-continued-lessons-in-domestic-counterterrorism

Facts, Bass. Can't ignore them even if you don't like them.

Wikipedia notes that Obama followed to the letter the agreement that George W. Bush had reached with the Iraqi government

You're quoting Wikipedia now? Seriously? If that WERE true, then Obama would have a sizable force and would have established a SOFA which he did neither. I really don't know what your're talking about.

You do know anyone can go and edit Wiki? It would have far easier for you to put a link from Thinkprogress or the Daily Kos. Smh.

Donald Trump says it is ridiculous for Jeb Bush to claim that his brother, President George W. Bush, “kept us safe.” “The World Trade Center came down during his reign,” Trump says. “He was the president at the time, and you know, you could say the buck stops here.”

Blaming Bush for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks is an absurd, left-wing talking point. The fact is, when Bush took office on Jan. 20, 2001, planning for 9/11 was well underway.

Bush inherited a world where terrorists had been permitted safe haven in terrorist states and were engaged in a virtually unimpeded offensive. Under his predecessor, they had launched a string of attacks against the United States: the first effort to bring down the World Trade Center in 1993; the murder of 19 American airmen at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia three years later; the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; and the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, which caused the deaths of 17 American sailors.

In none of these cases was there a forceful U.S. response. As a result, al-Qaeda was convinced that the United States was soft and that if they hit us hard enough, we could be forced to retreat and withdraw as we had in Beirut and Somalia.

They miscalculated. Unlike his predecessor, Bush did not respond by firing cruise missiles into empty tents and abandoned obstacle courses. Within weeks, U.S. special operations forces were on the ground in Afghanistan, and in less than a month they had destroyed the Taliban regime and driven al-Qaeda from its sanctuary there. After Afghanistan’s liberation, the United States and its coalition partners captured or killed hundreds of al-Qaeda leaders, managers and top operational commanders responsible for day-to-day planning of the terror group’s activities across the globe, including 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed.

To uncover and disrupt follow-on attacks, Bush established a program at the National Security Agency to monitor terrorist communications. He built new programs at the Treasury Department to deny extremists state-of-the-art banking and financial tools, thus making it more difficult for them to raise funds, move money, pay operatives, bribe officials and finance new attacks. He established the CIA program to detain and question top terror leaders — an effort that doubled our intelligence on al-Qaeda. He created the Department of Homeland Security and a new director of national intelligence and transformed the FBI and the Justice Department to fight terror

Yeah, facts do matter.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7DI7u-TytRU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L2513JFJsY

I know liberals love to create a beautiful utopian of inflated realities and the Unicornverse, but even I'm shocked hearing this. That's like saying the US never reached the moon, let alone walk on it.

Yes, and the right siders like to stretch the truth beyond belief. One so called kill order missed and Bill Clinton did nothing at all in his eight years of office trying to kill OBL.

Trump shoots off his mouth with zero knowledge or consideration of reality, even when directly confronted with it.

And then he goes on about how the media is biased, simply because they point out when his words show he doesn't actually know what he's talking about.

Because he's the winningest winner that ever won, and he'll be winning so much the loser's heads will spin with amazement at how much he wins!

And then he goes on about how the media is biased, simply because they point out when his words show he doesn't actually know what he's talking about.

I don't always agree with Trump, but saying that the media isn't bias is like saying Mickey Mouse is actually a beaver. But at least for now, they are putting the screws more to Hillary and finally they are actually doing their job.

Blaming Bush for the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks is an absurd, left-wing talking point. The fact is, when Bush took office on Jan. 20, 2001, planning for 9/11 was well underway.

Bush inherited a world where terrorists had been permitted safe haven in terrorist states and were engaged in a virtually unimpeded offensive. Under his predecessor, they had launched a string of attacks against the United States: the first effort to bring down the World Trade Center in 1993; the murder of 19 American airmen at the Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia three years later; the 1998 bombing of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; and the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, which caused the deaths of 17 American sailors.

Bass4funk: Maybe you're right. It's like blaming Obama for the world he inherited after taking over for Bush. After all, he inherited a very unstable economic situation in the U.S., as well as an unstable world in the Middle East from Mr. 'Mission Accomplished' George Bush.

Wesley Clark's "seven countries in five years" transcript for anyone who has forgotten:

I knew why, because I had been through the Pentagon right after 9/11. About ten days after 9/11, I went through the Pentagon and I saw Secretary Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz. I went downstairs just to say hello to some of the people on the Joint Staff who used to work for me, and one of the generals called me in. He said, “Sir, you’ve got to come in and talk to me a second.” I said, “Well, you’re too busy.” He said, “No, no.” He says, “We’ve made the decision we’re going to war with Iraq.”

So I came back to see him a few weeks later, and by that time we were bombing in Afghanistan. I said, “Are we still going to war with Iraq?” And he said, “Oh, it’s worse than that.” He reached over on his desk. He picked up a piece of paper. And he said, “I just got this down from upstairs” -- meaning the Secretary of Defense’s office -- “today.” And he said, “This is a memo that describes how we’re going to take out seven countries in five years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran.” I said, “Is it classified?” He said, “Yes, sir.” I said, “Well, don’t show it to me.” And I saw him a year or so ago, and I said, “You remember that?” He said, “Sir, I didn’t show you that memo! I didn’t show it to you!”

http://genius.com/General-wesley-clark-seven-countries-in-five-years-annotated

Many Americans died in the towers attack by Saudi suicide bombers. Then Republican President GW Bush used that as an excuse to invade Iraq which led to hundreds of thousands of deaths and the present disastrous fighting going on now in Islamic countries. The first responders and the troops that he sent to die and be injured were indeed brave Americans. But the invasion was itself an evil aggression and we must never again use U.S. military might so carelessly.

Actually Bush used the attacks to demand that Taliban-controlled Afghanistan hand over Bin Laden. When the Taliban refused, Bush used that refusal (with near-universal support from the rest of the world's countries) to send troops into Afghanistan and recover Bin Laden on their own. As the U.S. troops swept through Afghanistan, deposing the Taliban in the process, no Bin Laden was found. With the U.S. troops nearing the end of their complete sweep of Afghanistan, the Bush Administration grew concerned at the huge embarrassment a failure in capturing the orchestrator of the 9/11 attacks would create. A distraction was desperately needed to keep the minds of the U.S. citizens off the failure. Thus the "weapons of mass destruction" red herring was created out of an Iraqi purchase order for some aluminum tubes. Check out the timing. Either this was the "Mother of all coincidences" (to paraphrase Hussein) that this new "threat" appeared within a week of the U.S. forces finishing their fruitless sweep, or this was a manufactured "threat" to keep the American populace off-balance. Unlike the decision to go into Afghanistan, the decision to go into Iraq was NOT supported by the majority of the world. Many countries rightfully said, "Uhh how does Iraq ordering 5"-diameter aluminum tubes provide proof that WMDs are being created?"