Pick6;758126 wrote: In fact, the bombing is the main reason we joined WWII.
dwccrew;758134 wrote:We'll have to agree to disagree. But I think we can all agree that both men were great threats to the US and the world is much better off that both of these men are dead.
dwccrew;758117 wrote:I equate greater enemy to greater threat. Hitler was a much greater threat during WW2 than Osama has ever been; just because we weren't alive to experience it and we are alive to experience the threat of Osama doesn't make Osama the greater threat.
Many of the things you said (creation of P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act and spending money on Iraq war) were not because of Osama, it was because of fear mongering politicians that used Osama as an excuse. Iraq has nothing to do with Osama, so I don't see how that can be factored in to the damage that Osama has inflicted on this nation. The PA was a means to monitor US citizens that certain members of the government have want to implement and when 9-11 happened it was the perfect opporttunity to pass it. You think they really wdrafted that legislation in a few days after 9-11 or do you think it was already sitting on someone's desk before that?
dwccrew;758117 wrote:I equate greater enemy to greater threat. Hitler was a much greater threat during WW2 than Osama has ever been; just because we weren't alive to experience it and we are alive to experience the threat of Osama doesn't make Osama the greater threat.
Many of the things you said (creation of P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act and spending money on Iraq war) were not because of Osama, it was because of fear mongering politicians that used Osama as an excuse. Iraq has nothing to do with Osama, so I don't see how that can be factored in to the damage that Osama has inflicted on this nation. The PA was a means to monitor US citizens that certain members of the government have want to implement and when 9-11 happened it was the perfect opporttunity to pass it. You think they really wdrafted that legislation in a few days after 9-11 or do you think it was already sitting on someone's desk before that?
lhslep134;758135 wrote:I disagree. The Axis Powers taking over the world was the main reason we joined WWII, but Japan bombing us gave us the justification we needed to finally declare war.
Franz Ferdinand's assassination wasn't the reason World War I started but it was the justifiable reason to start it.
dwccrew;758121 wrote:Other than that, I have said my thoughts on the subject and it seems the majority agree according to the poll. Otherwise I suppose it is subjective.
Bullshit. The Iraq war was part of the "War on Terror", if Osama and 9/11 never happened we wouldn't be there, period.dwccrew;758117 wrote: Many of the things you said (creation of P.A.T.R.I.O.T. Act and spending money on Iraq war) were not because of Osama, it was because of fear mongering politicians that used Osama as an excuse. Iraq has nothing to do with Osama, so I don't see how that can be factored in to the damage that Osama has inflicted on this nation. The PA was a means to monitor US citizens that certain members of the government have want to implement and when 9-11 happened it was the perfect opporttunity to pass it. You think they really wdrafted that legislation in a few days after 9-11 or do you think it was already sitting on someone's desk before that?
Fly4Fun;758180 wrote:Dwccrew's posts have been pretty much spot on here.
Here's an analogy of some sorts.
Suppose there is an irritated wasp nest and one has already stung you (can sting more than once) and a man with a gun and you just slept with your wife. Who is the greater enemy? I'd say the man with the gun. He's more of a threat than a freaking wasp.
Osama/AQ, and angry nuisance that while did make one act that was awful... didn't have enough power (men and weapons/technology) to really do heavy damage. While the Nazi regime and the USSR (throwing this in as it fits, a great threat but never really did anything on US soil besides espionage) were close to equals and had potential to inflict a hell of a lot more damage than Osama could. Osama didn't even run a country, just a band of crazy radicals.
2quik4u;758190 wrote:that was never going to happen
lhslep134;758218 wrote:If Germany develops the atomic bomb before we do, who knows. You can't use the word never.
sleeper;758221 wrote:Is this seriously the line of logic you want to go down? "If"? They didn't, period.
lhslep134;758228 wrote:I wasn't using it as justification for my opinion. I'm offering a hypothetical situation that was actually conceivable, therefore it is impossible to say it would never happen.
Scarlet_Buckeye;758235 wrote:WHY DO YOU FOOLS GIVE THIS MONKEY THE TIME OF DAY?!?! It is unbelievable the sheer number of people on this site who haven't figured out IT is nothing but a TROLL!
se-alum;758209 wrote:Reality > Potential. Also, a rag tag band of militants can turn into a powerful entity if given the opportunity(see Revoloutionary War).
Jawbreaker;758271 wrote:Germany's air ministry as early as 1938 were developing plans to bomb the US. In the end, the advancement of the Allies prevented this from happening.
FatHobbit;758370 wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amerika_Bomber
The U.S. only got involved after the surprise attacks on Pearl Harbor and Germany's declaration of war against the United States a few day later. I wouldn't say we had much of a choice.Frothy Walrus;758445 wrote:We chose to get involved with Germany and Adolph Hitler.
We did not choose to get attacked by the terrorist Osama bin Laden.
So for that reason alone, I can understand why people are saying bin Laden.
My opinion, they were both assholes....and both died before their time was up. In the long term, Hitler was probably the bigger asshole to the US.
