Who was responsible for 9/11?
Use debate tags!
Bush Administration and the Neo-Conservatives had everything to gain. I am for Capitalism, but they wanted to take to a whole new level. Maximize profit in war and death.
First, U.S.A. government wants global dominance ubiquitously economically and militarily especially where they can legally have permanent military bases set up in strategic areas of the world. They wanted a base in Iraq in the worst way.
Second, this relates to the Neo-Conservatives on profiteering on war. The entire war except for the first 3 months has been administrate and supplied by private companies such as food, water, health supplies, so the private companies, Haliburton, were being paid huge amounts of money to do simple tasks that ordinarily the military does it with no bid contracts.
Third, it is known as a false flag. A false flag is a tactic where the government masquerades a attack by doing the attack by themselves and blaming it on someone else. Hitler did this tactic to convince the people of Germany that Jews, Blacks and Christians were at fault for all the problems in Germany and they buried down the house where Hitler lived.
Fourth, the facts are buildings don't FALL at FREE FALL Speed no matter what circumstances unless it is a demolition. There has been 3 buildings in the history of concrete and steel buildings to collapse with only a fire, and those buildings were TC 1, 2 and 7.
Lastly, simplest logic is the North Tower was hit first yet the South tower collapse first, simple physics says that is impossible even in the wildest dreams that the heat from the jet fuel burned was so hot it collapsed the south tower first even though it was hit second and a half hour later.
YET EVEN WITH all this, the government's incompetence is so high that I doubt that thousands of government workers could collaborate in this event.
I agree that the American government wants global domination - they would be the first nation in history to succeed. I think it is extremely unlikely that it'll happen in the near future - history shows that such a large kingdom is difficult to hold on to.
I also agree that America is greedy - and that they would go to war if there could be profit from it.
"Maximize profit in war and death."- so far, we have had 5,378 casualties in the wars and another 2,819 dead from 9/11. We have also spent 972,041,000,000 dollars on both wars. Yeah, we gained a lot.
"U.S.A. government wants global dominance"- just because we are the most powerful country, doesn't mean we want to control the world. If we wanted to, we would definitely be fighting in more places than Iraq and Afghanistan.
"were being paid huge amounts of money to do simple tasks that ordinarily the military does it with no bid contracts."- they made money by giving it away?
"it is known as a false flag. A false flag is a tactic where the government masquerades a attack by doing the attack by themselves and blaming it on someone else."- this does nothing for your argument.
"the facts are buildings don't FALL at FREE FALL Speed no matter what circumstances unless it is a demolition."- the building was designed to collapse downwards. Supports of the building melted and when the top fell, it pushed the rest down with it. You really don't know anything about physics.
"Lastly, simplest logic is the North Tower was hit first yet the South tower collapse first, simple physics says that is impossible"- lol, what law of physics explains that that is impossible?
There is something so enticing about conspiracy theories, and they really evoke our natural mistrust for oppressive authorities like the American government. But for me, that's not a great reason to turn way from evidence-based and logical decision making. There is just no credible evidence that Bush had anything to do with it.
American foreign policy of the last few decades very much did help to create the conditions that caused 9/11 attacks to happen, but that's isn't the same thing as Bush actually being in any way responsible. Plus (in response to one of the comments) I don't see what this has to do with Iraq at all. I think the American media somehow manufactured this idea of a connection between those two countries - but it's just not there. I mean Osama Bin-Laden has way more connections to Saudi Arabia than to Iraq.
I do think the Bush administration took advantage of the tragic attacks on 9/11 to justify a totally unrelated neo-con experiment in Iraq. But IMO, it was crazy extremist terrorists that were responsible.
Side: frustrated crazies
And also, your fourth and last comments are just not true. I looked into this a long time ago when the whole metling steel thing was bothering me. It turns out that (of course, it seems so obvious) the steel only had to get hot enough to become brittle and structurally unstable. It didn't have to actually melt or anything.
Happy debating :)
A scientist's opinion on 9-11 conspiracy 'physics' (www.uwgb.edu)
Side: frustrated crazies