Cincinnati Bengals

Go Back   Cincinnati Bengals Message Boards - Forums > Off-Topic Forum > Klotsch

Klotsch Exchange recipes, talk about movies, comment on Jessica Simpson or anything you want. Just do it here instead of ruining someone else's football-related topic.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-07-2012, 06:04 PM
silenetwolf silenetwolf is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,703
Rep Points: 1762
Default Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Of these two, which do you feel was worse? For me it was 9-11 for two reasons: The attack specifically targeted civilians and the intelligence completely fell apart

So what do you all think?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-07-2012, 06:10 PM
XenoMorph's Avatar
XenoMorph XenoMorph is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: LV-426
Posts: 36,318
Rep Points: 36830
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by silenetwolf View Post
Of these two, which do you feel was worse? For me it was 9-11 for two reasons: The attack specifically targeted civilians and the intelligence completely fell apart

So what do you all think?
Well if what we hear is true.. They knew Pearl harbor was coming too and used it as an excuse to get into the war.


9-11 was a tragedy.. And has hurt our Freedoms since the incadent..

But I think Pearl Harbor was Worse. as it ultimately lead to the first nuke being used in an agrresive tactic. And it seems it cant be cleaned up.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-07-2012, 06:12 PM
Ben zoo 2 Ben zoo 2 is offline
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: In your head
Posts: 1,302
Rep Points: 2657
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

9-11 for me as well. At least the Japanese were targeting a military base. It was nation state vs nation state. Not a crazed group of zealots who do a dastardly, cowardly act then hide in the hills.
__________________
Can't we all just get along?
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-07-2012, 06:19 PM
BengaliJack's Avatar
BengaliJack BengaliJack is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 4,407
Rep Points: 8105
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Both attacks were cowardly, but at least the Japanese were targeting the military...where as the 911 attacks were directed at civilians.
__________________



Throw his way and get the FULL NELSON!!!

MEET MR. INTENSITY!!

Even Gronk don't want none of that!!
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-07-2012, 06:19 PM
wolfkaosaun's Avatar
wolfkaosaun wolfkaosaun is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa
Posts: 6,915
Rep Points: 11343
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Our emotions are going to be in tact with 9-11 since we were alive during it, remember it, and lived through the after-math.

Pearl Harbor? Very few people(if any) on this board were even alive during it. So, more people are likely to pick 9-11.
__________________

Follow me on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/wolfkaosaun
Writer For
http://stripehype.com/
http://whodazed.com/
My YouTube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/andwegiveup

Draft Rushel Shell when he declares!
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-07-2012, 07:48 PM
Sher Khan's Avatar
Sher Khan Sher Khan is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,733
Rep Points: 7595
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

I don't think you can really compare the two except for the coincedence of the number of people killed, which is nearly the same.

First, in 1941 we knew even while it was taking place who was responsible. At least those being attacked knew, and later that day so did the President. Secondly, the attack was conducted by another soverign Nation's military primarily against our military. I say primarily since quite a few bombs were dropped in residential parts of Honolulu, and some straffing took place of civilian vehicles whether by accidental mis-identification or on purpose. And then because we knew who committed the attack, coupled with the failed effort of the Japanese Diplomatic Service to deliver their ultimatum to the President of the United States prior to conducting an attack, it was in addition a Nation to Nation disgrace and bungled catastrophy of diplomatic relations.

911, was a terrorist attack by an unknown civilian, or quasi-military organization if you like, against a civilian target. It was not another Nation attacking us or our military. So for quite some time we didn't really know who it was. (Actually the White House did or should have, but let's not quibble). So there was no way to go to war, declare war, or anything of the sort.

So I don't see how the two can really be compared. As to which was worse? I think if you factor in the casualties suffered in WWII, or even just the Pacific as compared to casualties from Iraq and Afgahnistan, even over these last ten years, it doesn't come close, clearly the Pacific War was far worse by most any measure one would hold up, (however, remember also that Germany declared war on the United States as a result of Pearl Harbor, (the biggest mistake they ever made), and so we found ourselves at war globally and on two fronts instantly. So there was also that.

As for the often cited conspiracy theory that somehow FDR, or someone else knew that Pearl Harbor was going to be attacked, there has never been a shred of evidence of any fact to back up the accusation or conspiracy theory, anymore than there is any good evidence that 911 was a black flag operation by our own government to do away with our rights, or invade Iraq, or any of the other reasons offered up.

It was known that the Japanese were going to attack somewhere, and it was thought to be the philippines, but as far as actually knowing, exactly when and where, that is just another conspiracy theory. We simply did not know.

Now, if someone really wants a condemnation based in fact here's one.

As I said, US Military intelligence knew pretty much the Japanese were going to attack somewhere, and it was believed the most likely place was our Army and Air Forces in the Philippines. Our international communications abilities of the day not-with-standing, a full three days "after" the bombing of Pearl Harbor, General Douglas MacArthur's Army and Air Force (a consideral military force at the time), was completely caught off guard, lacking any visible signs of high alert preparations and for the most part, at least our Army Air Force was completely destroyed sitting like ducks on the ground in the attack on the Philippines and at Manila. So if there is a blame of knowing something and not taking preperations to avoid it, Douglas MacArthur has to own that blame.

Now here's a tid bit of fact and technical debate if you like, which is little known history that one might use for a conspiracy theory, unfortunately if you're American or British, it tends to absolve the Japanese not the Americans or Allies.

The Japanese Navy had sailed South with a major naval force in what US Intelligence correctly thought was an attack, but incorrectly though exclusively in the Philippines or perhaps even Australia. What they did not know was that part of the Japanese Forces sailing South were bound for Malaya, North Borneo, and Sarawak.

To shorten the story, the first action seen in the entire Pacific War was not at Pearl Harbor as most believe. The first hostilities consisted of Japanese Troop Transports with landing craft full of Japanese troops headed for the British held beaches of Kota Bahru in Kelantan, (Northeast Malaya). There has long been a dispute of purely technical details in this mind you, but there is some evidence to back up the argument that British Shore Batteries fired on the Japanese Troop Transports and British Indian Army units fired on Japanese landing craft at Padang Pak Amat beach, prior to the Japanese actually firing on the British forces. Now, this all took place a full 90 minutes prior to the bombing of Pearl Harbor! That's a fact, undisputed. What is less certain, is who actually fired first. Some accounts say the British forces fired at the Japanese landing force first, and some say the Japanese landing force fired first. It was clear the Japanese were landing a hostile military force on British held soil and had a sizable hostile naval force offshore. Due to the time differences, this landing or assault at Kelantan took place near midnight their time, an hour and a half before the attack on Pearl Harbor and the Japanese were looking to surprise the British at Kalentan, so they did not plaster the place from a shore bombardment from naval ships guarding this landing force from sea. Therefore the dispute as to who fired the first shot.

Again, it's purely technical ofcourse. But if you're looking for a conspiracy story, well then the Allies may have fired on the Japanese first. And so the whole story of the Japanese firing on us first (it actually is true that the British and Japanese were engaged in combat 90 mintues prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor), so if one considers England and the United States as (us), and if one further wants to consider that engagement as a provocation of war, and then argue that the Japanese were fired on first, that might just make a good conspiracy story. Since clearly the British military and the Japanese military were engaged in combat an hour and a half before Pearl Harbor and might be a provocation against Japan. As to who fired the first shot? History has never really sorted that out, but some accounts say the Brits didn't wait to be fired on, and opened up with shore artillery first on the Japanese Troop Transports offshore prior to their landing craft hitting the beaches at Padang Pak Amat. As for the Japanese landing craft and the British Indian Army units holding the beaches at Padang Pak Amat and which one fired first? No one really knows. That would be like saying what came first, a bomb hitting Hawaii on the ground, or someone taking a shot at the Japanese plane dropping it. However, in this forum that issue may be of great consequence.

So, there you have it. The Allies fired first. The Brits started the whole Pacific War, and the poor Japanese were just defending themselves after we so dastardly provoked them (or at least the British did), as they just happened to be there and never really meant to get out of the landing crafts at Kelantan, and so we forced their hand to invade the Pacific in order to defend themselves, including ofcourse, the quite necessary bombing of Pearl Harbor. Any coincedence that six of their aircraft carriers were in Hawaiian waters is just purely accidental.

How's that for a conspiracy theory!
__________________


October 24, 1937
Crosley Field in Cincinnati, Ohio
Los Angeles Bulldogs at Cincinnati Bengals


Last edited by Sher Khan; 12-07-2012 at 08:23 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-07-2012, 08:03 PM
pennsyltuckian pennsyltuckian is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 328
Rep Points: 1092
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by wolfkaosaun View Post
Our emotions are going to be in tact with 9-11 since we were alive during it, remember it, and lived through the after-math.

Pearl Harbor? Very few people(if any) on this board were even alive during it. So, more people are likely to pick 9-11.
My grandfather was a hoarder. We were cleaning out his place after he died and I came across Cincinnati Enquirer dated June 7, 1944 (for those that don't know, that is the day after D-day). I read that newspaper as well as a few other resources there and got as much of an insight into the mindset of people at that time without be alive to see it.

It may just be the way the media covered 9-11 as opposed to that but the mix of fear and uncertainty with a determination and a belief in something bigger than the individual, or even nation, far out shadowed what I personally saw around me after 9-11. Keep in mind the D-day landings were 2 years after Pearl Harbor and those emotions were still there. That much time after 9-11 and many were already wanting the military to pull out of military activity because they felt we accomplished some semblance of retaliation.

Yes, the 9-11 attacks were worse for reasons others mentioned in a way, but if you count in the scale of what ensued and the time of high emotions across the nation, I'd say Pearl Harbor had a bigger effect on the nation.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-07-2012, 08:16 PM
NDfanatic's Avatar
NDfanatic NDfanatic is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: East End
Posts: 2,432
Rep Points: 5310
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

I don't think they can compare that easily. As someone already mentioned, 9/11 is fresh on our minds because we were alive to see it. If you were alive in 1941 onward, you would have probably said Pearl Harbor.
__________________

Steeler Eater, thank you for ^^^^^^. It's greatly appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-07-2012, 08:16 PM
Nebuchadnezzar Nebuchadnezzar is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Indiana
Posts: 4,668
Rep Points: 9088
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

If you really think about it, 9/11/01 was worse than 12/7/41.

Compare the two in every way possible and you will know what I mean.

In terms of loss of life, 12/7/41 is way worse. All those men killed in a pre-emotive strike and the war that followed cost man, many more lives than 9/11/01. Not to mention those who were wounded.

In terms of the American people, while 12/7/41 brought everyone together and galvanized this country, 9/11/01 did the exact opposite.

12/7/41 didn't infringe on Americans rights, 9/11/01 brought about the department of homeland security, warrant less wiretaps, indefinite incarceration without legal representation and I'm sure there is more.

12/7/41 put the United States at the top of the Super Power list while 9/11/01 has dropped us from number one and we keep falling.

12/7/41 gave birth to the greatest generation, 9/11/01 gave birth to entitlements and lazy Americans.

12/7/41 gave us great presidents like Kennedy and Ike, 9/11/01 got Bush jr. re-elected and Obama.

I'm sure a lot of this stuff could be argued that it was happening before 9/11/01 and that's true, but it wasn't as noticed or widespread.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-07-2012, 08:21 PM
NDfanatic's Avatar
NDfanatic NDfanatic is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: East End
Posts: 2,432
Rep Points: 5310
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar View Post
If you really think about it, 9/11/01 was worse than 12/7/41.

Compare the two in every way possible and you will know what I mean.

In terms of loss of life, 12/7/41 is way worse. All those men killed in a pre-emotive strike and the war that followed cost man, many more lives than 9/11/01. Not to mention those who were wounded.

In terms of the American people, while 12/7/41 brought everyone together and galvanized this country, 9/11/01 did the exact opposite.

12/7/41 didn't infringe on Americans rights, 9/11/01 brought about the department of homeland security, warrant less wiretaps, indefinite incarceration without legal representation and I'm sure there is more.

12/7/41 put the United States at the top of the Super Power list while 9/11/01 has dropped us from number one and we keep falling.

12/7/41 gave birth to the greatest generation, 9/11/01 gave birth to entitlements and lazy Americans.

12/7/41 gave us great presidents like Kennedy and Ike, 9/11/01 got Bush jr. re-elected and Obama.

I'm sure a lot of this stuff could be argued that it was happening before 9/11/01 and that's true, but it wasn't as noticed or widespread.
I would add to that list, not necessarily on one side or the other though, that Pearl Harbor came before the television in every home era. 9/11 was seen by millions, basically live. It was broadcast 24 hours a day for weeks, months. Because of that, it was relived every time you turned on the television or clicked onto the Internet.
__________________

Steeler Eater, thank you for ^^^^^^. It's greatly appreciated.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 12-07-2012, 08:34 PM
Sher Khan's Avatar
Sher Khan Sher Khan is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,733
Rep Points: 7595
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar View Post
If you really think about it, 9/11/01 was worse than 12/7/41.

Compare the two in every way possible and you will know what I mean.

In terms of loss of life, 12/7/41 is way worse. All those men killed in a pre-emotive strike and the war that followed cost man, many more lives than 9/11/01. Not to mention those who were wounded.

In terms of the American people, while 12/7/41 brought everyone together and galvanized this country, 9/11/01 did the exact opposite.

12/7/41 didn't infringe on Americans rights, 9/11/01 brought about the department of homeland security, warrant less wiretaps, indefinite incarceration without legal representation and I'm sure there is more.

12/7/41 put the United States at the top of the Super Power list while 9/11/01 has dropped us from number one and we keep falling.

12/7/41 gave birth to the greatest generation, 9/11/01 gave birth to entitlements and lazy Americans.

12/7/41 gave us great presidents like Kennedy and Ike, 9/11/01 got Bush jr. re-elected and Obama.

I'm sure a lot of this stuff could be argued that it was happening before 9/11/01 and that's true, but it wasn't as noticed or widespread.
Well now lets hold on there a moment.

WWII brought on warrentless searches of anyone reported as suspect to the FBI. Whether such accusation was true or not. Thousands of Japanese Americans were rounded up and forced into prison camps guarded with machine guns and barbed wire, shipped hundreds of miles away from their homes in the stinking desert where it was 110f in the summer and freezing below zero in the winter. All of their possessions, their property, and their businesses were forced to be abandoned or given away. The notices they received were nailed to telephone poles or slapped on their front door, and they were given about three to five days to pack up (no more than a couple of suit cases per family mind you), and be ready to get in a truck at rifle point. And in many, many cases with their sons in uniform fighting for this country. Imagine that!

Furthermore, if you were German American or Italian American you were automatically held in either contempt or suspect to the FBI and watched or followed. Same thing applied to being incarcerated without due rights, even more so since there wasn't a lot of wussying around in those days, and the mood of the country wasn't inclined to worry about someone's rights.

After 911, no one has been asked to sacrifice a thing. Let alone pay more taxes and a bunch of wimpering about taxing the rich. I think the most that was asked of anyone after 911 was when we were asked to go shopping. Back then there was rationing of a whole host of things, gasoline, tires, sugar, pork, beef, chocolate, you name it, (and don't even think about getting caught cheating or off to the whoscow for you).

In WWII taxes sky rocketed for the duration of the entire war for everyone, there wasn't any hand wringing over who was rich and who was middle class, yet if you didn't also buy War Bonds, you were looked at as a traitor by the neighbors and at work. Speaking of which, unless you were missing an arm or leg, or were over 35 years old and were not in a uniform and off to war, then everyone looked at you like you were a lepper. Otherwise, regardless of how you felt about the war, your hind end was off to a theater of war somewhere (not for some namby pamby year or two). Nope, depending on when you turned 18, your caboose was off to the war front until it was over over there. In some cases, that was four long years. No cell phones to talk to Mom, Dad, and Sister Sue or your wife. A letter was it, heavily censored, every single word read by a military/government censor and blacked out if it even appeared to say something that someone thought sensitive. Sensitive was up to the gumment censor.

Oh, I left out the air raid black outs? See, after dark in any city in this country (even a city of 10,000 - like Whoville today), you better either have had your windows painted black, or every curtain closely covering the windows so not a peep of light shown through. If you didn't, you stood to be fined by the Air Raid Warden, (likely as not a neighbor who you better be on friendly basis with), as a first offense. Keep it up and off to the whoscow again for you. (You don't learn, we'll learn ya by God). There wasn't any pampering in those days.

So how could you possibly say that Pearl Harbor did not result in the infringement of American's rights?

I would also argue that 911 did in fact galvanize this country. I was here, I saw it. It was only after bumble-fudge managed to completely derail the train and lie to the entire world about yellow cake, and Sadaam Hussain having a nuclear arsenal and we'd first see that in a mushroom cloud over America, and then promised everyone a rose petal covered highway to Baghdad.

That whopper was topped only by the witless strategy of somehow allowing al-Queada and Bin Laden to waltz out of Tora Bora into Pakistan, (and that was when we had them surrounded. I mean someone couldn't yell "Come out with your pants up!), not to mention using a military strategy in Iraq something akin to cowboys and indians, where we held the cities and allowed everyone else to do what they wanted in the country side, at least until some time down the road in that war. Remember the great Shock and Awe? I watched that, and laughed till I cried. Shock and awe. I saw a puff here, a spark there, maybe a little whoosh over there. I mean in WWII, entire cities were being bombed into fire storms. Holland, Belgium, Poland, Russia, England, France, all of the Eastern Balkins, Greece, the entire European Continent, and then Germany, Japan, most every country in Asia, China, Australia (the North West coast), New Guinea, all of the Pacific Islands at least that had cities, the Philippines, Eastern India, Burma, and so on. It was not uncommon in mid to late WWII, for 25, 30, 70 thousand people to die in a single nights air raid in Germany or Japan. That was there alright, not here. But in England tens of thousands had been killed in air raids, and about the time that slowed down, the Germans pop up with V1 and V2 rockets that sailed into the cities in random and completely unpredicted places. A V2 carried about a 2 ton warhead. Shock and awe, shock and awe is 1,000 B-17's or B-29's dropping incindaries that cause a firestorm of up to 2,000F and 200 mph winds that kills 50-70 thousand people and erases an entire city from the map. That's why, it wasn't a good idea to use terms like that so loosely and cause people who know better to stare into the television and laugh at the White House in wonder and awe how anyone like Secretary of Defense Rumskull could be so stupid. It did not promote galvanization.

It had the entire effect of convincing large segments of this country that the Marx Brothers were running the war in Iraq.

Here's something to consider, just a small fact. Three months after Pearl Harbor was attacked, the US Army 8th Air Force consisted of less than a dozen men, and no planes. By the end of the Air War over Europe, the 8th Air Force had lost 30,000 air crewmen, dead, or missing. In addition to the 6000 heavy bombers lost, there were 500 medium bombers, and 2500 fighters lost. The Luftwaffe went down swinging. And that is just the 8th Air Force in Europe, who did not even arrive until mid-1943. The aftermath of 911 looks like a picnic compared to our involvement in WWII. I think that most agree on that, but the numbers of the dead and missing in the war after Pearl Harbor are completely mind numbing. The United States lost nearly a half a million, England lost nearly a million, Russia isn't sure but allows for 50 million, China has no idea but it's probably somewhere close to the 50 million range also. But that's really a wild guess. They have no idea. Total cost in human lives for WWII. A good guess, might be somewhere close to 125 million depending upon which country's actually have a good idea. That leaves out China, Russia and most of Asia.

Economy? What economy? In WWII no one had much money to buy anything even if it wasn't rationed, which most things were.

Did we cover the part about the White House not having the first clue for 8 years as to where bin Laden was, finally out of desperation at some point saying he (bin Laden), didn't matter any longer (didn't matter any longer!?!. Really). Remember when he hauled out the brass bands and doned a flight suit like he'd seen a cockpit in the last 45 years, and climbed aboard an aircraft carrier to bravely announce Mission Accomplished! Mmm, nope. Actually, we're still over there today.

I'm not even sure what 650 million dollars spent every six hours by the Pentagon, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, including weekends, holidays, Christmas, Easter and Arbor Day even amounts to after 12 years, let alone the what, 200 billion that dissappeared in Baghdad?

I mean, did I leave something out? So I think numb nuts is what caused the disolution of what was originally a great galvanization of collectivity in this country after 911, not the American people.
__________________


October 24, 1937
Crosley Field in Cincinnati, Ohio
Los Angeles Bulldogs at Cincinnati Bengals


Last edited by Sher Khan; 12-08-2012 at 10:21 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 12-07-2012, 08:37 PM
pennsyltuckian pennsyltuckian is offline
VIP Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 328
Rep Points: 1092
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar View Post
...12/7/41 didn't infringe on Americans rights, 9/11/01 brought about the department of homeland security, warrant less wiretaps, indefinite incarceration without legal representation and I'm sure there is more.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanes...can_internment

Other examples of your statement being inaccurate exist but I'll leave that to others to throw out there.
Edit: I got a call and had to stop in the middle of typing this out so I see Sher Kahn mentioned this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar View Post
...12/7/41 gave birth to the greatest generation, 9/11/01 gave birth to entitlements and lazy Americans.

12/7/41 gave us great presidents like Kennedy and Ike, 9/11/01 got Bush jr. re-elected and Obama....
Only time will tell on both of these since these seem to be long term implications you are trying to compare.

Bush was the sitting president so that would be comparable to Truman since he was elected after finishing Roosevelt's term.

Last edited by pennsyltuckian; 12-07-2012 at 08:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 12-07-2012, 09:21 PM
Steeler Eater's Avatar
Steeler Eater Steeler Eater is online now
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: I got this
Posts: 12,493
Rep Points: 18502
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by NDfanatic View Post
I don't think they can compare that easily. As someone already mentioned, 9/11 is fresh on our minds because we were alive to see it. If you were alive in 1941 onward, you would have probably said Pearl Harbor.
Couldn't have said it better myself.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 12-07-2012, 09:29 PM
silenetwolf silenetwolf is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,703
Rep Points: 1762
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Here is another reason why I believe 9/11 was worse. It gave the President an excuse to attack Iraq. I firmly believe that we knew there were no WMD's in Iraq. Also there may have been more casualty's in World War II, with the worse atrocity being the Holocaust. However 9/11 caused the lives of over 3,000 civilians in this country and as careful as we are we cannot prevent collateral damage in Afghanistan, and Iraq is still not stable. We are heading for another Vietnam in Afghanistan IMO, and that turned out very badly for the U.S.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 12-07-2012, 09:33 PM
duke0476's Avatar
duke0476 duke0476 is online now
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Ohio
Posts: 7,051
Rep Points: 14806
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

They were both horrible. Why does one have to be worse?
__________________
"I believe the game is designed to reward the ones who hit the hardest. If you can't take it, you shouldn't play." Jack Lambert.

"The Steelers drafted guys who were bigger, stronger and faster than I, but they never found one who could take my job away from me." Jack Lambert

Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 12-07-2012, 10:10 PM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 14,720
Rep Points: 38280
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by duke0476 View Post
They were both horrible. Why does one have to be worse?
The "Japs" were fouler than any terrorist organization with what they were doing to the Chinese at the time. Just the one incident to the other however, 9-11 is much worse. Anonymous terrorists slaughtering civilians is more foul and gutless than one nation attacking a military base of another. We may not have been engaged with Japan militarily yet but we were clearly the friend of their enemies with whom they were engaged.
__________________
When the opponent is focused and determined, as they tend to be in the big games, Lewis and Dalton melt and disintegrate.... Entirely out of their element.
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 12-07-2012, 10:11 PM
CKWI88 CKWI88 is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,271
Rep Points: 4654
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by duke0476 View Post
They were both horrible. Why does one have to be worse?
This.


To make a discussion out of it however... I'd go with 9/11 as well. So many senseless deaths in senseless wars after it happened. At least after Pearl Harbor we knew who attacked us and had the chance to retaliate effectively. It's been nothing but downhill and the loss of young men and women in conflict that didn't need to happen.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 12-07-2012, 10:27 PM
Sher Khan's Avatar
Sher Khan Sher Khan is offline
VIP Silver Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Maryland
Posts: 3,733
Rep Points: 7595
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Terrorism conducted against civilians is indeed gruesome murder. No doubt about it.

Fire bombing of cities killing tens of thousands of civilians who die in a single attack I think is hard to compare. Just based on the shear numbers involved.

The worst terrorist incident I know of would be 911. Three thousand or so civilians.

The worst fire bombing raid I know of was Tokyo, 70 thousand or so civilians.

Don't care much for the Japanese?

Okay, in England. I think it was around 10-12 thousand civilians in a single raid.

Military casualties in the wars since 911 (America only), amount to 5, maybe 6 thousand. WWII (America only, just shy of 500,000).

Not sure how you even compare them. Sort of depends on whether you're closer in years to one event or the other. Which is I think what someone was saying in another post. I think the other is the numbers involved in WWII. It's hard to wrap your mind around the numbers of 25, 30, up to 70 thousand killed in one bombing raid, in one city. Conservative estimates of 60-70 million dead, not out of the question entirely perhaps 125 million dead. In one war lasting only 4 years.

I admit, that is pretty tough to think about.
__________________


October 24, 1937
Crosley Field in Cincinnati, Ohio
Los Angeles Bulldogs at Cincinnati Bengals


Last edited by Sher Khan; 12-07-2012 at 10:57 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 12-07-2012, 11:24 PM
silenetwolf silenetwolf is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,703
Rep Points: 1762
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by duke0476 View Post
They were both horrible. Why does one have to be worse?
Absolutely, but both events caused changes to our country and how other country's look at us.
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 12-08-2012, 02:28 AM
Johnny Cupcakes's Avatar
Johnny Cupcakes Johnny Cupcakes is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: The District
Posts: 13,241
Rep Points: 26190
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

They were equally horrible events.
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 12-08-2012, 08:25 PM
Lolli's Avatar
Lolli Lolli is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CTC
Posts: 9,766
Rep Points: 13837
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

One was a military target....
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 12-08-2012, 09:28 PM
Shake n Blake's Avatar
Shake n Blake Shake n Blake is offline
VIP Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Homers gonna home
Posts: 14,954
Rep Points: 34589
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Just looking purely at the attacks, 9/11 was worse. With Pearl Harbor, they took military planes and attacked a military installation. With 9/11, they took commercial airliners and wrecked it into buildings full of civilians. Plus with modern media, the whole nation saw it live on TV. We also had to see countless horrific replays of the incident, with people jumping out of the building, etc.

So in short, I think 9/11 was a far more traumatic event for the nation. That said, if you add in the wars that followed, Pearl Harbor was FAR worse. As Sher Khan mentioned, entire cities were being carpet bombed. We dropped the nuke on Hiroshima. There were more casualties in one day on the beaches of Normandy than there's been in 10 years of our current wars.

Wars back then weren't fought with occasional ambushes and IEDs. It was a constant face to face bloodbath. The amount of casualties was mind boggling.
__________________

Last edited by Shake n Blake; 12-08-2012 at 09:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 12-08-2012, 09:55 PM
THEBURG THEBURG is offline
VIP Gold Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 9,398
Rep Points: 7448
bengals Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shake n Blake View Post
Just looking purely at the attacks, 9/11 was worse. With Pearl Harbor, they took military planes and attacked a military installation. With 9/11, they took commercial airliners and wrecked it into buildings full of civilians. Plus with modern media, the whole nation saw it live on TV. We also had to see countless horrific replays of the incident, with people jumping out of the building, etc.

So in short, I think 9/11 was a far more traumatic event for the nation. That said, if you add in the wars that followed, Pearl Harbor was FAR worse. As Sher Khan mentioned, entire cities were being carpet bombed. We dropped the nuke on Hiroshima. There were more casualties in one day on the beaches of Normandy than there's been in 10 years of our current wars.

Wars back then weren't fought with occasional ambushes and IEDs. It was a constant face to face bloodbath. The amount of casualties was mind boggling.
I see your point, but I think the folks that did it was more cowardly, they are always going to take the cowards way, The Japs at least did it with their military.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 12-09-2012, 12:19 AM
savagehenry54's Avatar
savagehenry54 savagehenry54 is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Columbus
Posts: 14,720
Rep Points: 38280
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Shake n Blake View Post
Just looking purely at the attacks, 9/11 was worse. With Pearl Harbor, they took military planes and attacked a military installation. With 9/11, they took commercial airliners and wrecked it into buildings full of civilians. Plus with modern media, the whole nation saw it live on TV. We also had to see countless horrific replays of the incident, with people jumping out of the building, etc.

So in short, I think 9/11 was a far more traumatic event for the nation. That said, if you add in the wars that followed, Pearl Harbor was FAR worse. As Sher Khan mentioned, entire cities were being carpet bombed. We dropped the nuke on Hiroshima. There were more casualties in one day on the beaches of Normandy than there's been in 10 years of our current wars.

Wars back then weren't fought with occasional ambushes and IEDs. It was a constant face to face bloodbath. The amount of casualties was mind boggling.
I totally agree. If you isolate just the individual "days of infamy", if you will, 9-11 was way worse imo. As for the carnage that followed, it's WWII without a doubt.
__________________
When the opponent is focused and determined, as they tend to be in the big games, Lewis and Dalton melt and disintegrate.... Entirely out of their element.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 12-09-2012, 01:35 AM
Benton's Avatar
Benton Benton is offline
MB HOF Inductee
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Benton
Posts: 14,063
Rep Points: 51083
Default Re: Which was Worse Pearl Harbor Or 9-11

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nebuchadnezzar View Post
If you really think about it, 9/11/01 was worse than 12/7/41.

Compare the two in every way possible and you will know what I mean.

In terms of loss of life, 12/7/41 is way worse. All those men killed in a pre-emotive strike and the war that followed cost man, many more lives than 9/11/01. Not to mention those who were wounded.

In terms of the American people, while 12/7/41 brought everyone together and galvanized this country, 9/11/01 did the exact opposite.

12/7/41 didn't infringe on Americans rights, 9/11/01 brought about the department of homeland security, warrant less wiretaps, indefinite incarceration without legal representation and I'm sure there is more.

12/7/41 put the United States at the top of the Super Power list while 9/11/01 has dropped us from number one and we keep falling.

12/7/41 gave birth to the greatest generation, 9/11/01 gave birth to entitlements and lazy Americans.

12/7/41 gave us great presidents like Kennedy and Ike, 9/11/01 got Bush jr. re-elected and Obama.

I'm sure a lot of this stuff could be argued that it was happening before 9/11/01 and that's true, but it wasn't as noticed or widespread.
I dunno if there's anything with this I agree.

The first one, yes, death tolls were different. They were also really different. More died in WW II, but it was a war. With what followed 9-11, soliders died outside of a war in what could have been handled much more efficiently using means outsde the military.

9-11 didn't bring everyone together? For the first few years, completely disagree. Everything was too pro-American. I say too pro-American because it was after that people realized some less than American things were happening (no-bid buddy contracts, invading Iraq which wasn't as involved with terrorists as other countries, etc).

Didn't infringe on rights? Not familiar with the American concentration camps? Red scare?

WTF? We have the largest military and spend more than the next 10 countries combined... but we're not the world's biggest super power any more? Come on.

Greatest generation. Ok. Not to take away from what they did, but a large amount of growth came from that time, prompted mostly by massive government spending. And that spending was supported by taxes, mostly collected from businesses and top earners. Now, we have plenty of spending, but it's not going to any growth, it's just going to political buddies. But we still have massive accomplishments, mostly done by private individuals with little or no money. Which is different and, in many ways, makes modern achievements better. And on a different but similar note, workers in the greatest generation had the strength of the economy and, for many, unions to support them. Todays workforce is guilted by conservatives to think it should work twice as hard for half the money and fewer benefits.

Kennedy didn't do much. Really. He wasn't a bad guy and what happened to him was horrible, but he wasn't a great president. Could have been, sure. I'd agree on Bush, although I don't think as negatively of Obama as some.
__________________
If at first you don't succeed, giggle it.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:35 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2012 Cincinnati Bengals. All rights reserved. Do not duplicate in any form without permission of the Cincinnati Bengals.