Would You Define the Attack as Cowardice?

The President referred to the terrorist attack as cowardly, would you?

No. The people planning this knew it would result in their death and the deaths of those around them. I don't just mean the ones who actually did this. My dictionary defines a coward as a person who lacks courage in facing danger, difficulty, pain, etc... These people were not cowards and their attack was not cowardly. It was evil. I don't give these people credit for courage because their irrational and evil beliefs allowed them to have the state of mind to face danger. Only men with a rational appreciation of danger and consequences should be given credit for courage. So these people were neither courageous nor cowardly. Just garbage.

Not on the parts of the fanatic suicide operatives themselves, but perhaps on the part of the leader(s) of the terrorist organization.


Terrorism itself is perhaps an inherently cowardly act, a striking out at the helpless and innocent instead of at those whom one might feel are the cause of the problems or grievances.

Having a big enough vendetta to take out the lives of ten thousand innocents, yet not even having the courage to show your face is the epitome of cowardice. As for the those who gave their lives carrying out this heinous act? Please! They are brain-washed puppets who believed they were buying a ticket to heaven.

The hijackers that died were brianwashed maniacs too ignorant to realize that their masters who planned the attack were the ultimate of cowards. The hijackers themselves were neither cowards nor heroes perhaps not even human when they died. They were just forgettable wooden heads. Just ask the planners that refuse even now to acknowledge their own part in the attack. The hijackers died for nothing. They will not be remembered. It is the innocent victims that will be remembered. Make no mistake about that. Just ask any American.


vince

Even though a sneak attack, Pearl harbor was a military attack on a military target. Plus, the Japanese flew planes that could be clearly identified as if to say, "Yeah, it's us. we did this, here we are, now come and get us if you can!"


The ruse of people like khaday, the taliban, arafat and the Iranians to say "this is horrible" is just their way of trying to hide from the inevitable. We will extract revenge and most of the world will understand or at least tolerate it if some of the attacks are not so "surgical".

I think the people used for medical experiments, chemical warfare experiments, bayonet practice, or other such Japanese WWII activities could find some room to disagree.

Yes, to define Japanese actions in the 1930s and 1940s as "honorable" would be quite a stretch. SammyB was comparing Pearl Harbor with the events of 9/11. To compare degrees of "honorability" is also quite a stretch. The word simply does not apply to either action.

"Terrorism itself is perhaps an inherently cowardly act, a striking out at the helpless and innocent instead of at those whom one might feel are the cause of the problems or grievances."


Kinda like letting sick children in Iraq that could easily be helped die instead, just to get Saddam Hussein out of power, right?


Go on, America, join the crowd - retaliate the retaliation. But if you meet hatred with hatred you better destroy your enemy completely, or they will retaliate YOUR retaliation, and on it goes, like it has in some places in the world for centuries.


Like it goes on in the Middle East.


Welcome, America. Your now a part of the Middle East.

And I'm sure the U.S. is going to take honorable counter-action...