Bob Schieffer's closing remarks on Face the Nation.

[elocs]

He said that he was asked by someone if the pilots of the 9/11 planes when they crashed could be considered heroes because they gave their lives for their cause. He said that there was no way they could be considered heroes because they took innocent lives to promote their cause. Well, one person's terrorist is another's patriot and one person's sniper is another's sharpshooter. As horrible as 9/11 was for us, there are others in the world who have a different perspective and to them one that is justifiable. I also wondered, how many innocent lives did we knowingly take when we dropped the atomic bombs on Japan in WWII? It would seem that it is alright for us to take innocent lives to promote our cause, but nobody else can do it.

[angstlessk]

1. I recall Bill Maher was fired over something similar.

but I guess some people get a free pass while other get fired?

[Lexingtonian]

3. timing is everything....

[qnr]

11. IIRC, Bill took a different tack, comparing people that gave their lives

to what they believed in, to others that were currently dropping bombs on people from tens of thousands of feet. Part of it was people thinking he was insulting US pilots currently in action or something of that nature. However, this is just my known-to-be sketchy memory talking.

[BootinUp]

13. Maher said they acted with courage.

[MaineDem]

2. Can you clarify for me please?

All of your post was Schieffer's commentary?

Wow!

[napi21]

6. Yep! Schieffer said exactly that!

And yes, Mahar was fired forsaying a very similar thing.

I think there are 2 differences though.

1. Bob Schieffer has been an anchor host for a very long time and has a reputation for being afairly non-partisan straight shooter, and Bill Mahardid have a show called Politically Incorrect at the time.

2. When Bill made his comment, it wasn't very long afterthe 9/11 incident. It's been 5 years now, and that comment doesn't soundas shocking.

[elocs]

8. Yes, that was at the heart of his commentary.

How our heroes (and they were) were the true heroes of 9/11 and how it was our greatest moment.
This does beg the question as to whether the people of Hiroshima considered the crew of the Enola Gay were heroes when they dropped the atomic bomb on the city?

[Danascot]

4. Are we heroes when we kill

thousands of innocent civilians, mostly children, in Iraq?

The rest of the world condemns us but here at home not enough of us object to stop it.

[alvarezadams]

5. Our little exercize

in denying self determination in SE Asia killed a few million. A previous, proxy 9/11 of ours (in Chile) killed a few more than Al Qaeda did. No need to mention the hundreds of thousands killed in any number of conflicts (or the 1 million+) that died because countries elected the wrong governments.

[TomInTib]

7. We immolated more than 100,000 to get one guy (Noriega)

The City of Angels burned in a matter of hours.

[gratuitous]

9. This gets confusing real fast

Because if the suicide hijackers aren't heroes to their compatriots for taking innocent lives to end a threat to them, then can we honestly call the folks who crashed flight 93 heroes? After all, they took a lot of innocent lives to end the threat their plane represented to their compatriots.

Maybe it's time to put a moratorium on the word "hero." Not a permanent retirement, but let's just put "hero" in the back of a drawer for a little while. It's bandied about far too freely right now to have any real meaning.

[indepat]

10. By George, I think you have got it. How many innocent lives have been

wasted by the good guys wearing the white hats?

[BootinUp]

12. Its never ok.

But to deny that war is justified in some situations is to take a tough position to defend as well.

The difference I see between your examples, is you have a case where a small group decides to "go to war" and decide on legitimate targets vs. a country and government making that decision. There is a difference there in that presumably a government acts for its population in matters of war. Who are the 19 hijackers acting for?

In the case of Iraq it is much messier and damning against us I think because I seriously question whether we gave Iraq a choice before we attacked. If a state is providing support to terrorists, essentially making them mercenaries then there is further justification for taking whatever action is necessary to stop them from carrying out attacks.

[reichstag911]

14. "Who were the 19 hijackers acting for?"

As they understood it, they were doing it for the entire Muslim population who have been oppressed directly and indirectly, by the US and its kleptocratic, oligopolistic surrogates, for generations...to say nothing of Israel and our unquestioning support of their policies, despite their longstanding disregard for UN Resolutions (the putative reason for our decade+ of sanctions on and bombing of Iraq...until we needed that Security Council vote, that is).

[BootinUp]

15. Thats a problematic belief

As you can see, and thanks to Bush's rhetoric, the American population also believes that, and then it feels justified to attack anywhere in the Mideast.

As I recall there where no governments hailing the 9/11 attack as a great thing. Iran had a pretty nasty comment though. But small groups of people can not act for entire civilizations with no formal organizational structure. Its impossible to have any discussions to avoid war or accept responsibility.

[reichstag911]

16. "...small groups of people can not act for entire civilizations..."

Wouldn't that pretty much describe the current "American" corporate oligopoly, though? While they may still retain the veneer of a formal organizational structure, that formal structure does not have its intended input to the decisioon-making process that moderates delusional, faith-based and/or kleptocratic foreign policy positions.

[BootinUp]

17. The structure is in place though, even if some members

do not feel represented. (That would be us)

[reichstag911]

18. Not just us,...

...but the professional, non-partisan, government bureaucracy that is supposed to moderate the entire process. The only ones represented by this admin are the radical, greedy, antitax crowd; the delusional, xenophobic warmongers; and the Rapture-ready redneck retards who are under the mistaken impression that their alleged faith (read: genuine ignorance) is a badge of honor before God.

[BootinUp]

19. ok, you put that very well. lol.

But I think you know what I mean too.

I know the system appears terribly broken. I myself am quite distraught over this latest plan to air propaganda over the broadcast airwaves in spite of strong objections form a former President and countless others including politicians on both sides!