Social Question

Hawaii_Jake's avatar

9/11. Who won?

Asked by Hawaii_Jake (37357points) September 11th, 2011

Osama bin Laden, the mastermind of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, is dead.

Thousands of civilians perished that day. Thousands of troops have died fighting two wars since. Estimates are over 100,000 civilians have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US alone has spent $1.25 trillion on the two wars.

We endured a financial panic in September, 2008, worse than anything since the Great Depression. Many nations are still reeling from the aftershocks, and government banks are cash strapped and perhaps incapable of aiding the world economy. The economic ruin continues despite the stimulus package that was thrown at it.

What’s more, the US political system seems broken. The parties are barely capable of discussing anything diplomatically. Citizens demonstrate as much intolerance at times.

The recession aside, is what we are experiencing a cyclical change in politics in Western countries? Or is it a fundamental shift in the way things work?

Should the economic difficulties be traced to the cost of the two wars?

Did the attacks of 9/11 cause us to lose our common sense?

Who won the War on Terror?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

32 Answers

jerv's avatar

The Republicans won to a large extent since they did a good job on capitalizing on people’s fears and wringing every drop of political juice they can out of it even now, a decade later.

Al Qaeda won quite handily since they made our nation crack and then we collapsed under our own weight just like the WTC towers.

Common sense and the American taxpayers have lost.

dreamwolf's avatar

To be fair, a threat was evident, I dont think they played on the fear. If it really happened, which an attack did, it could happen again. Should we have our leaders tell us? Oh everything is fine, its perfect now. I’m a liberal, but even that would be a bunch of bologna. Then we’d all say, “this admin. is doing enough! they’re hiding the threats!.” Who won on terror? It still exists. I was 14 when it happened. Now I’m 23 going on 24. I feel like there is stability within the States however. And politicians will use anything for the rest of its life to stay in power. It’s what they do. We don’t live in a society of nobility where intentions over lap reality. 9/11 put a dent in American society through symbolism. What was attacked? The Towers. What did the towers represent? Big Business. Who wanted control of business within the Middle Eastern region for its own profits? Bin Laden and his followers. So they could be a super power as well. Oh and it could’ve happened, they have natural resources, like oh, oil and it correlates to money real well. So to answer your question, I feel like the war is still constant, and will be forever. The economics definitely be traced back to these wars post 9/11. Anyone could look up how much money has been spent into militaristic invasions by the U.S. According to Washington Post, 3 Trillion has been spent on the war.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Sweet holy moly, I think the jury is still out on that one. Thought the US supposedly got Bin Laden, still waiting for the photos like they paraded the dead Uday and Qusay, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, etc. Uncle Sam was never bashful in parading their ”Big Catch” around in the media for all the world to see.

The US has killed way more of them than was lost. Though the future cost of all those disabled vets could be the slow cancer that dooms the US over time, like asbestos in the lungs, don’t do much in the beginning but certainly devastating later on. With our economy almost on life support and the cost of these wars over time I can see the effects lasting longer for the US than those overseas. As the saying goes, they can make 100 mistakes, the US has to make only one, and they will have stuck again. How many times can you not roll snake eyes?

9/11 overall was a bust. The Towers usually held about 40,000 people. If they were half full even there would have been 17,000 dead easily. To get away with less than 4,000, that is like robbing a brinks truck and only bagging $600.

augustlan's avatar

We all lost. Even countries that didn’t have anything to do with it have suffered because of it.

Cruiser's avatar

Halliburton and the rest of these corporations.

Qingu's avatar

I don’t think “winning” and “losing” are the right words to talk about things like this.

Al Qaeda’s main goal was to strike an economic blow to the United States. Did they succeed? Well, I don’t think you can draw a straight line between the 2008 financial meltdown and 9/11 or Bush’s overreaction to it. Yes, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are crazy expensive, but our debt was actually not a contributor to the financial crisis (though it has certainly hampered our response to it).

Also, Al-Qaeda’s overwhelming goal is cosmic, to bring down Western hegemony through violence and replace it with a caliphate. To this end they have failed miserably; the Arab Spring has largely replaced al-Qaeda’s strategy.

I also think there is a much broader question: our society is technologically advanced enough that a few very motivated people can spend a small amount of money and time to kill a lot of innocent people. How does society protect against such people, whoever they are?

Obviously I don’t think the correct answer to this question is “to invade a country that had nothing to do with such an attack.” But what about spending billions of dollars and months training several units of Navy SEALs and developing stealth helicopters just to kill one guy —a guy who, with a fraction of that money and tech managed to murder 3,000 people? Is that the right answer? It’s not a mathematically satisfying answer… and I’m not sure there are any satisfying answers.

marinelife's avatar

I agree with @Qingu. there is no direct correlation between 9/11 and either the financial crisis of 2008 or of the political meltdown that has occurred lately.

As to who won the war on terror, I don’t think there are any winners. Our massive response will have the end result of breeding new generations of terrorists.

Cruiser's avatar

@marinelife I would think getting back a trillion plus dollars would go a long way to taking a dent out of the deficit!

marinelife's avatar

@Cruiser Yes, it would, but it was not the cause of the collapse.

mattbrowne's avatar

Kindness and solidarity.

jerv's avatar

@marinelife I concur; that was a systemic flaw in how our economy is run. However, starting a large military campaign is always expensive, and starting one that drags on instead of a quick, decisive, “shock and awe” victory is like ripping the bandages off of your wounds; it will take a bad situation and turn it into one where you bleed to death.

And it doesn’t help that our reaction to 9/11 has taken people that would otherwise grumble on the sidelines and turned them into people that actively seek to do us harm.

@mattbrowne Sadly, many now consider Muslims (not just the radical extremists, but all of them) as non-humans who don’t deserve kindness. Needless to say, that makes things worse.
As for solidarity, the Republicans were united in fillibustering funding for 9/11 first responders (a measure which passed the Senate with 81 votes once it came up for a vote) for the sole purpose of forcing the Democrats to agree to extend tax cuts for the top 2%. That willingness to exploit heroes to further your political agenda weakens the average American’s faith in government, which in turn weakens our nation further.

filmfann's avatar

No one wins this kind of thing.
We are still here, but we have changed, and the country has changed. Many freedoms we had are lost, and I believe the economy has been greatly damaged due to the 9/11 attacks.
Will we recover? That is the real question.

LuckyGuy's avatar

Who won? Let’s see… the 19 slime bags who did it are now recycled dust in a nadfill somewhere. The governments that sponseored and supported it have been pretty much bombed back into the stone age. The Taliban are a deseperate joke willing to kill innocents to prove they still have dicks.
Meanwhile, we’re here, trading ideas and humor, sipping coffee and enjoying our dinners tonight in the comfort of our own homes with thremostats set at 70 degrees.
I’ll let you decide who “won”.

jerv's avatar

@worriedguy You forgot the part about us now having more intolerant, hate-filled xenophobes than we did pre-9/11.

incendiary_dan's avatar

I’m gonna say the overall security apparatus that drastically increased in size afterwards. More private intelligence contractors are used than government employed ones.

LuckyGuy's avatar

@jerv Yep. Intolerance on both sides of the fence.
My coffee was delicious, by the way. I had french vanilla flavored creamer. I wonder what they had.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@worriedguy Meanwhile, we’re here, trading ideas and humor, sipping coffee and enjoying our dinners tonight in the comfort of our own homes with thermostats[sic] set at 70 degrees. Many people enjoyed those things long before the towers fell, and they still did not really appreciate it for what it is. They were not like this poor chap, who would love to have even a half of cup of that coffee or just the cream that went in it. He and his never bombed a fly and yet they still have nothing.

bkcunningham's avatar

What does a starving child from the southern Sudan have to do with what happened on September 11, ten years ago or since?

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

Maybe about as much as having A/C, and cappuccino decades before 9/11, has to winning, or not.

bkcunningham's avatar

Oh, gotcha.

flutherother's avatar

What I found as disturbing as the events of 9/11 was the government of the United States authorising the use of torture. No good has come out of this and there are no winners.

Cruiser's avatar

They did…Al Qaeda got waaay more than they bargained for and here it is 10 years later and we are spending millions for security on this day just to honor a day of terror at their hands. I bet they are sitting around the TV high fiving knowing they won’t have to expend another live body nor a dime attacking US soil for a long time coming as long as we are scared shitless of the Taliban Boogie Man treading on US soil.

bkcunningham's avatar

I’m watching the NY Giants. The stands are overflowing full. I was just thinking about this NFL “game of the week” and how symbolic it really is today on 9/11. (We only need someone from Steelers doing the commentary instead of Joe Bluck. I’m glad to live in America. God bless this country and her people. I know, we as a people, aren’t perfect. But you know what? I think overall, we are pretty damn awesome. You and me. The different personalities and minds that come together in the cyber world. I can’t think of any place I’d rather live and enjoy life with my family and friends. I hope the Giants win.

LuckyGuy's avatar

My answers was a little too simplistic. But then again, so was the question.
How do you determine the “winner” of any conflict? I do it by objectively looking at the two sides and deciding who ended up with the marbles. Which team T-shirt would you want to wear? Still too simplistic for you?
We are all sitting here exchanging ideas in relative comfort. Why? Because we educate ourselves and build things. We have a government, like it or not, that supports infrastructure and laws and freedom of the individual.. We don’t have roving bands of militia like Somalia. We don’t have Taliban stoning women, we don’t strap bombs around our the chests of our children and send them into a mosque, we don’t….
Oh what’s the point? If you don’t get it, you don’t get it.
Today is Sunday, I worked outside in the garden. I had a great lunch. I emailed a few friends, and there is good chance of a little playful romping between the sheets later, after a nice shower. Tomorrow, I will work and try to accomplish something great.
That sounds like a winning combination to me.

Hawaii_Jake's avatar

@worriedguy : The question was too simplistic? Did you read the details?

LuckyGuy's avatar

Sure it did. But then you followed it up with so Who won the WOT?

Defense contractors, Halliburton, newly hired employees of TSA, FEMA, the directors of the various agencies who got face time and cushy private sector jobs later.

Care to share a NY Reisling with me?

jerv's avatar

@worriedguy We did all of those things before 9/11 though. The question really is asking to look at the changes brought about by 9/11 on both sides and figure out which side got the fuzzy end of the lollipop.

They wanted us to live in fear, and now we have more fear than we did; Terrorists 1, US 0

We made more enemies. Terrorists get more men on the field for the remainder of the game.

We spent trillions we don’t have on two wars as a direct response to 9/11; Terrorists 1, US -1.

I am really trying to figure out any change post-9/11 that is actually notably positive for America, but I can’t. There are plenty of small improvements like making Americans more aware that we are not the only nation on Earth, but all of the major changes seem to be in their favor and/or to our detriment.

jerv's avatar

Hey, more government spending, fraud, waste, and abuse! Yay us!

LuckyGuy's avatar

Clearly we would be better off spending money on something other than bombs, bullets and bureaucracy. But we are still here to talk (and bitch) about it. That is a win.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

“Be extremely subtle, even to the point of formlessness. Be extremely mysterious, even to the point of soundlessness. Thereby you can be the director of the opponent’s fate.” Sun Tzu. For the most part, they seem to have that down. We spent the last 5 days worrying about what three mysterious men will do or not on 9/11 or near it.

“If you are far from the enemy, make him believe you are near.” Sun Tzu. Think they got that one wrapped up too. They got us thinking sleeper cells are dotted all about just waiting to strike.

”Hence that general is skilful in attack whose opponent does not know what to defend; and he is skilful in defense whose opponent does not know what to attack”. Sun Tzu. They have no perfected that one yet, but getting eve closer. If there are sleeper cells and you do not know who they are, you can’t stop them. If you have so many targets and ways to hit them but do not know which ones are in the crosshairs, you can protect them all. Uncle Same has to be right 100 time out of 100 times, they can be wrong 99 times, they only need to be right once.

mattbrowne's avatar

@jerv – Are the “many” you refer to the majority? If not, they didn’t win. There are hatemongers in the US and in Europe and elsewhere. Have they won? I don’t think so. A recent example is Norway. And when I watched the 911 memorial last Sunday I clearly had the impression that kindness and solidarity won.

jerv's avatar

@mattbrowne A minority that gains appreciably in numbers can be considered to have achieved some degree of victory even if they don’t become the majority. More followers, more power… sounds like winning to me.
Also note that people generally tend to be a bit more low-key at memorials and (with the exception of Westboro Baptist Church) you don’t see many rallies at funerals. Even bigots often have some sense of decorum.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther