If 3000 slaughtered soliders are "a pittance" are 3000 slaughtered on 9/11 the same?

[Proud2BAmurkin]

Time magazine says the 3000 slaughtered US soldiers represent "a pittance." Guess we can all shrug our shoulders about 9/11/01.

:shrug:

[eleny]

1. do you have a link for that?

[madmusic]

3. Previous thread, here...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=3045629&mesg_id=3045629

EDIT: freepers saying ONLY 3000.

[NYCGirl]

5. The freepers saying it is substantially different from Time Magazine!

:eyes:

[NYCGirl]

2. Got some context for that? NT

[Sydnie]

4. DING DING

We have a winner ... only problem is, we didn't choose to sacrifice 3,000 people on 9/11 ... but this latest 3,000, we "own" that all on our own. Makes it so much easier for them to discount them because, well, they volunteered. Makes me angry that they don't see that death is death and it's worse when we offer them up willingly.

[Warren Stupidity]

6. Why yes it was a small price to pay to get the ball rolling.

Or so I've heard that the neofascist cabal thinks.

[JVS]

7. American Companies lost property on 9/11, gained it by plundering Iraq

$100 is a pittance for a new car. It's a whopping sum when someone kicks you in the nuts and steals your wallet.

[eallen]

8. In what context? Such questions simply have no meaning without context.

For example, if you're asking about risk, then yeah, the terrorist attack on 9/11 was a mere blip. I've never considered Americans at significantly greater risk because of it. If you doubt that, look up how many Americans die from accidental causes, in a single year.

If you're asking about 9/11 compared to other terrorist attacks, then it is large. Most are are relatively minor. Many don't succeed. Even 7/7 didn't come near the number of deaths or global media presentation as 9/11.

If you're asking about 9/11 as justification for the Afghanistan war, then it is a judgment call. How far should the US go to pursue the organization behind one of the largest terrorist attacks, and the nation that harbored him at the time? Since Osama is still on the lam, some will argue we haven't gone far enough.

But to just ask about the scope of something, outside of context, doesn't make much sense at all. Numbers are just numbers, unless set in some context.