The attacks on the pentagon and the world trade center in 2001 were a response to?

a) the presence of the united states in the middle east and its support for Israel


b) the rising cost of oil


c) the collapse of the soviet union


d) the questionable election results of 2000
The attacks on the pentagon and the world trade center in 2001 were a response to?
A i believe
The attacks on the pentagon and the world trade center in 2001 were a response to?
If I have to choose one of your four options, I%26#039;d have to say %26quot;A%26quot;. The other answers have nothing to do with 9/11.
Reply:a
Reply:A but C and D didn%26#039;t help and the whole mess led to B and, as some believe, a repeat of D four years later.
Reply:They were not a %26quot;response to%26quot;; they were an excuse for %26quot;A.%26quot;





Terrorism is never a rational reason for anything. To give it rationality by insisting it was a %26quot;response%26quot; means that we can %26quot;respond%26quot; to Iran%26#039;s hatred of Jews by killing the students at Tehran University; or %26quot;respond%26quot; to China%26#039;s treatment of Tibetans by killing the people in a market in Beijing.





If a terrorist is truely %26quot;responding,%26quot; then no reason A through ZZZ is necessary--they will do as they want, when they want, for whatever reason they want, because they can choose anything they want to, as something to %26quot;respond%26quot; to.





The correct answer is: %26quot;Muslim terrorists kill even their own kind, if their own kind do not keep strictly to the terrorists%26#039; views of the Muslim religion. The good Muslims are as terrorized by all this as we are. Look at all the good people killed in the markets and squares of Iraq. Look at how many of their policement were slaughtered, some of them just waiting in line to ENLIST in the police.


%26quot;Muslim terrorists need no reason, need no excuse, but hide behind the %26quot;idealism%26quot; of a %26quot;purified Muslim society.


%26quot;It is their own form of %26quot;ethnic cleansing,%26quot; except that the whole world is what they want to cleanse.%26quot;





Answering %26quot;A%26quot; gives legitimacy to these brutal acts of inhumanity to man. Do not give them that legitimacy.
Reply:Who are the terrorists? Lacking a legitimate political base and having no real popular support, they use terror to lash out at the strongest opponents who occupy positions of power. We have always had terrorists and they cannot be appeased or negotiated with. There is no reason guiding their actions except to create as much havoc and suffering as they can. There is no way for the terrorists to gain a position of power because they would be crushed by legitimate governments who are the true representatives of the people. It is simply a struggle of sanity and reason vs the madness and savage wrath of a frustrated foe.
Reply:INCREDIBLE ANSWER BY GENE!





I go with: GENE%26#039;s answer + a^2








Well, there you have it.





.
Reply:The Islamic extremists responsible for the attack chose these buildings as symbols of United States dominance of the world, and particularly the subjugation of Islamic countries to Western interests and ideologies. I would say that they considered the killing of thousands as regrettable %26quot;collateral damage%26quot; to their act of higher purpose. All too familiar logic these days.





Though the level of complicity is unknown, the 9/11 attacks were most probably bankrolled (and perhaps with some Saudi government knowledge) from Islamic charities in Saudi Arabia -- through Osama Bin Laden. He is a member of one of Saudi Arabia%26#039;s most powerful families (which the Bush administration thought it %26quot;controlled%26quot;). %26#039;Exiled%26#039; in Afghanistan, Bin Laden masterminded a %26quot;double-blind%26quot; network of terrorist cells -- perhaps with the tacit support of his family or government, or both. He himself probably did not know the exact nature or timing of the hijack plan. In any event, it is unlikely that anyone, including the perpetrators or Bin Laden, expected the Twin Towers to be entirely destroyed. The attack, while meant to be devastating, was primarily symbolic, and far exceeded expectations. Hence his obvious surprise and glee we see on video of him as he watched the events on television. The target scheduled for United 95, (crashed at the cost of their lives by the heroic resistance of its passengers) is not known, but it was most probably destined for The Capitol or The White House.





These buildings symbolically stood for what the terrorists (18/20 of whom were Saudis) saw as the epicenters and symbols of United States%26#039; and Western Judeo-Christian imperialism -- economic (The WTC), political (The Capitol or White House) and military (The Pentagon).





In all, 9/11 will be seen by history as one of the most significant events of our era, whose long-term effects are still in the process of resolution -- particularly, (and contrary to common belief, at least in the United States), in Iraq. Our invasion there was a response to 9/11 (directed toward the Saudis, NOT Saddam Hussein and his mythical WMD%26#039;s, nor his relatively small oil reserves), and was absolutely necessary in order to bring a significant military presence into that theater after the attack, and thereby protect our national security as well as to guarantee the safety of our enormous economic AND strategic interests in the area. In that sense the invasion, war, and occupation -- however costly, were and are justified. And again, once 9/11 occurred, immediately necessary as the only viable plan of action, short of a direct invasion of the Saudi peninsula which would most probably have provoked WWIII.
Reply:a