Sept 11 and our response.........

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Read this article. As a former military person, "hawk", this doesnt suprise me one bit anymore.......

http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp...wsdate=8/4/2006

[gwilson]

we know the response was inadequate. This is nothing new. The FAA screwed up and didn't get the info to SAC in time. It was something no one expected. You can bet it won't happen again though.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

we know the response was inadequate. This is nothing new. The FAA screwed up and didn't get the info to SAC in time. It was something no one expected. You can bet it won't happen again though.

I dont know if you are aware of this or not, but SAC has long ago been disbanded. That happened against the wishes of the "hawks". That opens up a whole other can of garbage that makes me sick just to think about it.

The reason no one expected it was because they got rid of all the primary thinkers, hawks. The "hawks" were labeled "dieing breed and demented". The "hawks" are people that always expect the worst and constantly plan for it to happen as well as an overwhelming response to it. Response such as "the end all solution". The hawks were removed and replaced with a bunch of falsely enlightened jackasses that were of the erroneous belief that "it can never happen here". People that have become too comfortable and "enlightened". Group of stupid clowns with grandious visions of world peace and unity. Protection and peace through cooperation and understanding. Bunch of BS that belongs in a Hollywood film and not a real life scenario.

I have said before that i knew the SIOP had changed, but i didnt know just how much so until a few months ago. Sickens me to and through the core!!!!!!

[nmm]

I personally dont have anything against 'Hawks'. In my opinion, Hawks are patriots of their nation who desire to do all they can to protect their homeland.

Thats all fine and dandy, but my only criticisms are that Hawks for some odd reason dont harness the power of their minds. From what i have seen, they are the first ones to make high flying statements, rash and bold accusations, and are uncapable of understanding 'the other side'.

Hawks are like the Confederate army in the Civil War. Justifying the slavery of the blacks as a "Christian" thing, unable to see that the feudal planatation lifestyle was the economy of the past, and overall dettached from the wider world.

If there was only a way to produce the best of being a Hawk and the best of Liberals into one entity, alas how glorious it would be.

[TheNiche]

I personally dont have anything against 'Hawks'. In my opinion, Hawks are patriots of their nation who desire to do all they can to protect their homeland.

Thats all fine and dandy, but my only criticisms are that Hawks for some odd reason dont harness the power of their minds. From what i have seen, they are the first ones to make high flying statements, rash and bold accusations, and are uncapable of understanding 'the other side'.

Hawks are like the Confederate army in the Civil War. Justifying the slavery of the blacks as a "Christian" thing, unable to see that the feudal planatation lifestyle was the economy of the past, and overall dettached from the wider world.

If there was only a way to produce the best of being a Hawk and the best of Liberals into one entity, alas how glorious it would be.

Just so you're aware, the Civil War was not a single-issue war and most Confederate soldiers did not own slaves or plantations. Also, there are ways to combine Hawks and Leftists. They don't make for a very productive combination. A lot of assassins come to mind.

But Hawks do have their place within the military. And really, that's about the extent of their place. It is because politicians are the ones that are meant to think out the big moral questions and to put limits upon military action where necessary. The military's job is merely to execute the mission using whatever means have been granted them. Within those politically-set bounds, they should be allowed free reign. After all, hawks are very efficient at what they do. Their concerns are really very simple. Destroy the enemy with minimal American casualties...and if you make them, they can even get around a "minimize collateral damage" objective with relative efficiency. And they'll do that very effectively. Don't tell me that they don't harness the power of their minds.

Having said all this, I wouldn't support the use of hawks as politicians...nor would I expect them to be very successful in political endeavors. Moderation and sensitivity are not their specialty, just as you pointed out.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

.

But Hawks do have their place within the military. And really, that's about the extent of their place. It is because politicians are the ones that are meant to think out the big moral questions and to put limits upon military action where necessary. The military's job is merely to execute the mission using whatever means have been granted them. Within those politically-set bounds, they should be allowed free reign. After all, hawks are very efficient at what they do. Their concerns are really very simple. Destroy the enemy with minimal American casualties...and if you make them, they can even get around a "minimize collateral damage" objective with relative efficiency. And they'll do that very effectively. Don't tell me that they don't harness the power of their minds.

Having said all this, I wouldn't support the use of hawks as politicians...nor would I expect them to be very successful in political endeavors. Moderation and sensitivity are not their specialty, just as you pointed out.

Mr Niche, i am impressed!!!! "Hawk" training and mindset is a very different world. You have probably gathered that from some of the things i say and believe in as well as the delivery of said things. I DO NOT support a hawk in any sort of political position. We are trained to be anti-politics and thats not the sort of person i would like to see in a political position of power.

In the 1990's things began to change, the hawks were being run out faster than an unrepented whore in a church house! We were replaced with "outside" civilian think tanks and influences, most of which had always been there. This occured because it was "the economy stupid" The new president wanted to save money and cut defense spending yada yada yada. The result of that was a substantial savings in defense spending through the use of multiple outside entities. The problem with using non military entities such as the HIGHLY trained hawks is that the outside groups are HEAVILY influenced by the changes in political climate. It is not a consistent and focussed way of doing business. That opens the doors for slackers and other jackasses that become to comfortable and falsely enlightened. Perfect breeding ground for situations such as the US Embassy bombings and Sept. 11

[nmm]

Mr Niche

I concede. I wasnt looking at it from a purely military aspect.

As long as the Hawks remain far away from politics, the better. They are awesome at what they do, and i have high regard for them, as long as they abstain from making socio-political issues and keep at their respective fields.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

As long as the Hawks remain far away from politics, the better.

I could not agree more. Politics is no place for a hawk and there are not too many that would even consider going into politics.

[Montrose1100]

" It was a plausible scenario, after all, given the assurances that the Air Force stands ready to respond to an attack within minutes of an alert."

I remember watching the news 5 years ago (on Monday), and a couple minutes after the first plane slammed into the North Tower, the anchors said something along the lines of "And there is believed to be another plane on its way". I don't recall the exact time of that statement, but its not hard to do the math.

If people knew of the other plane, as in the public, wouldn't the officials (who are suppose to know before anyone) have thought to have sent the ok for jets to be in the air? And I'm not very accountable for air craft information, but can't jet fighters fly faster then commercial planes?

Another thing that gets me is how the Pentagon happened. But thats a whole different story. I'm glad the Russians never decided to nuke us... I wonder how many cities would have to be blown up for us to react?

Sorry, this post has been turned into a rant/or whatever you want to call it.

This shows how vulnerable we really are. And perhaps less now, but it still shows.

[TheNiche]

I remember watching the news 5 years ago (on Monday), and a couple minutes after the first plane slammed into the North Tower, the anchors said something along the lines of "And there is believed to be another plane on its way". I don't recall the exact time of that statement, but its not hard to do the math.

If people knew of the other plane, as in the public, wouldn't the officials (who are suppose to know before anyone) have thought to have sent the ok for jets to be in the air? And I'm not very accountable for air craft information, but can't jet fighters fly faster then commercial planes?

Another thing that gets me is how the Pentagon happened. But thats a whole different story. I'm glad the Russians never decided to nuke us... I wonder how many cities would have to be blown up for us to react?

Sorry, this post has been turned into a rant/or whatever you want to call it.

This shows how vulnerable we really are. And perhaps less now, but it still shows.

Your rant actually dovetails with exactly what Moonman was getting at. In the days when the hawks of the Cold War era were in charge of the military, there would've been a contingency plan for just this kind of event. And even though a lot of people would probably have considered it paranoid up until 9/11, they'd have probably had armed fighters parked on the tarmac, with pilots standing by. But without the hawks, we grow complacent and lazy.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I'm glad the Russians never decided to nuke us... I wonder how many cities would have to be blown up for us to react? .

The answer to your question is, 1. One or more cities/targets in the USA would have to be nuked in order for America to be able to respond. This ridiculous policy was put in place by the "its the economy stupid" president and his band of yes men.

I will try to draw a picture to make it a bit clearer......

If theres a missle launch against the USA, we will pick it up within seconds of said launch. A few minutes pass and we will know the exact destinations of said missle or missles. We are not allowed to respond to this attack until a detonation or multiple detonations have occured over sovereign American realestate. That was one of the most monumental forms of garbage to ever come out of the Clinton administration and as far as i know, it is still in place.

[nmm]

Did yall here about the ABC 9/11 movie and how the Clinton Administration is trying to shut it down?

Apparently the Sex Scandal got in the way of the Terrorism Warnings in Clinton's Administration.

[RedScare]

That was one of the most monumental forms of garbage to ever come out of the Clinton administration and as far as i know, it is still in place.

In other words, the Bush Administration is putting out equally monumental forms of garbage, OR, there is a good reason for the policy, OR, that was never the policy in the first place, and doesn't exist now.

To be honest, if YOU disagree with a US nuclear policy, I am inclined to believe the policy is a good one.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

In other words, the Bush Administration is putting out equally monumental forms of garbage, OR, there is a good reason for the policy, OR, that was never the policy in the first place, and doesn't exist now.

To be honest, if YOU disagree with a US nuclear policy, I am inclined to believe the policy is a good one.

In the only words, i didnt serve under Mr Bush. Clinton was the last president i served under. I speak fact not fiction...........

[TheNiche]

...OR, that was never the policy in the first place, and doesn't exist now.

I distinctly recall having read about this in a local newspaper when I lived in McAllen.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I distinctly recall having read about this in a local newspaper when I lived in McAllen.

I am a bit suprised. If you read it, the author of the article looked beyond the BS being shuffled from the Clinton people. They were not secretive with the actions, they actually told the American public. It was so shrouded in symbolic Hollywood type double talk that the avg. person would not REALLY understand its implications.

[nmainguy]

The answer to your question is, 1. One or more cities/targets in the USA would have to be nuked in order for America to be able to respond. This ridiculous policy was put in place by the "its the economy stupid" president and his band of yes men.

I will try to draw a picture to make it a bit clearer......

If theres a missle launch against the USA, we will pick it up within seconds of said launch. A few minutes pass and we will know the exact destinations of said missle or missles. We are not allowed to respond to this attack until a detonation or multiple detonations have occured over sovereign American realestate. That was one of the most monumental forms of garbage to ever come out of the Clinton administration and as far as i know, it is still in place.

I have to say, if there were the slightest bit of truth in the above, every right wing, Clinton hating, whacko from Limbaugh to Bush to Coulter would have been on it like flys on you-know-what. You'll need to offer up more than the tiered ol' "Them Hollywooders made it so unintellektuals like me caint unnerstand"

Seriously, I'm with Red: if you disagree with that policy, I feel safer already.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

I have to say, if there were the slightest bit of truth in the above, every right wing, Clinton hating, whacko from Limbaugh to Bush to Coulter would have been on it like flys on you-know-what. You'll need to offer up more than the tiered ol' "Them Hollywooders made it so unintellektuals like me caint unnerstand"

Seriously, I'm with Red: if you disagree with that policy, I feel safer already.

You are welcome even though you didnt say thanks. People like me did our job so well, our public went to sleep. Now that we are gone, you are hearing about and witnessing all sorts of horrible things on American soil. Things that would have been unheard of just a generation ago---for it would have been an open invitation to a MASSIVE and IMMEDIATE American NUCLEAR response.......

Are you enjoying the current state of things? Im not.

The hawks are filed into the boneyard of history replaced by some kids that dont know military training is there for the purpose of killing people. Im steering both of my boys AWAY from military service for that very reason. From what i read here, they will have a hard time and most probably be forced out for believing American lives should be placed in the battlefield for one purpose, and that is to win through killing people by any means at the disposal of our forces. Period. Failure is not an option.

[RedScare]

Are you enjoying the current state of things? Im not.

Me neither, but I didn't vote for the guy.

[MarthaG]

we know the response was inadequate. This is nothing new. The FAA screwed up and didn't get the info to SAC in time. It was something no one expected. You can bet it won't happen again though.

I wouldn't hold my breath on that. The 911 Commission "Report Card" shows we are making "F's"and "D's".

It's worse than waiting for the next Hurricane to hit, because at least then we will have a warning of it's arrival.

Every news anchor and expert I saw on TV tonight predicts another hit is coming on US soil. If it's anytime soon, we will not be in any better position to minimize loss of life than we were 5 years ago.

[Guest Marty]

I wouldn't hold my breath on that. The 911 Commission "Report Card" shows we are making "F's"and "D's".

It's worse than waiting for the next Hurricane to hit, because at least then we will have a warning of it's arrival.

Every news anchor and expert I saw on TV tonight predicts another hit is coming on US soil. If it's anytime soon, we will not be in any better position to minimize loss of life than we were 5 years ago.

911 Report card! How can you trust that when you got Sandy Berger sticking reports down his trousers!

[nmainguy]

911 Report card! How can you trust that when you got Sandy Berger sticking reports down his trousers!

Yes, that negates all the other efforts of anyone anywhere...right?

[TJones]

I wouldn't hold my breath on that. The 911 Commission "Report Card" shows we are making "F's"and "D's".

It's worse than waiting for the next Hurricane to hit, because at least then we will have a warning of it's arrival.

Every news anchor and expert I saw on TV tonight predicts another hit is coming on US soil. If it's anytime soon, we will not be in any better position to minimize loss of life than we were 5 years ago.

You have to watch for the signs, they attacked another embassy this morning, a failed attempt that will make them even more desperate to try something else and fast. I don't see the planes working for them again. I think if TSA, or whoever is checking passenger manifests, see more than 4 younger middle eastern men all on one flight, there will be a hold on the plane and everyone on board checked again.

Quit wasting time patting down old Grannies, and do a little profiling of middle easterners. Even though the amount of the middle eastern islamic fundalmental extremists are very few, it is the Arab race who do these sorts of incidents, aside from a couple of Cubans back in the 70's. It is a shame that it has to come to such measures, but the trade-off for not taking such measures is worse than a few hurt feelings.

[sevenmeadows]

You have to watch for the signs, they attacked another embassy this morning, a failed attempt that will make them even more desperate to try something else and fast. I don't see the planes working for them again. I think if they see more than 4 younger middle eastern men all on one flight, there will be a hold on the plane and everyone on board checked again.

Quit wasting time patting down old Grannies, and do a little profiling of middle easterners. Even though the amount of the middle eastern islamic fundalmental extremists are very few, it is the Arab race who do these sorts of incidents, aside from a couple of Cubans back in the 70's. It is a shame that it has to come to such measures, but the trade-off for not taking such measures is worse than a few hurt feelings.

I agree completely. To not pay extra attention to individuals who match the terrorist profile (including suspicous travel history for non-Arabs) is completely naive. It would be much more difficult for terrorists to recruit suicide candidates that did not meet this profile and would make them much more susceptible to infiltration by intelligence agencies.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Quit wasting time patting down old Grannies, and do a little profiling of middle easterners.

Yeah and quit wasting time putting the SSSS on my tickets for the special pat down. I understand the reason behind it for me, but common sense would cause anyone to see im not a threat. i make upwards of 50 INTL trips per year, most of them lasting only 1 day in Britain Germany Russia or Israel. For that i usually only pack a garment bag with 2 changes of clothing and sundries along with my laptop. That would be suspicious if i didnt travel so much. But since im such a frequent traveler, the security personel recognizes me, the people in the Presidents Club and the gate agents working the gates for the INTL flights even recognize me as well as the flight attendants. Spend the extra security time on people that are more suspicious, i dont think i fit the bill for a major threat to aviation.

[TJones]

Moonman, I would edit that post brotha, you may give a wannabe terrorist an idea, can you see what I am talking about ? Remember, sometimes it's who you know and not what you know, that gets you by.

[Houston1stWordOnTheMoon]

Moonman, I would edit that post brotha, you may give a wannabe terrorist an idea, can you see what I am talking about ? Remember, sometimes it's who you know and not what you know, that gets you by.

Nope i will not. The reason is, it is a well known fact. The only people that dont seem to know it is the people who are most affected by it and thats the American public. Very dangerous trend..........