what if 911 never ahppened

[7IsUnIucky]

seriously

[Painbringer]

-No Iraq war.
-No ISIS.
-Saddam Hussein still in power.

[FoAngel]

So i'm taking from this picture that all MLP's everywhere would fall instead of the towers

[DESHIEL]

this thread wouldn't exist.

[Maltos]

At 2/12/15 07:55 AM, RSCakeBomb wrote:

At 2/12/15 07:51 AM, Deshiel wrote: this thread wouldn't exist.

MOM GET THE CAMERA

So if someone changes the past then this thread shall be no more?
so that means every single post in this thread by any staff mod or user is pointless

[someaveragechap]

Obvious answer: a lot of dead people would actually be alive today.

[DESHIEL]

At 2/12/15 08:07 AM, Maltos wrote:

At 2/12/15 07:55 AM, RSCakeBomb wrote:

At 2/12/15 07:51 AM, Deshiel wrote: this thread wouldn't exist.

MOM GET THE CAMERA

So if someone changes the past then this thread shall be no more?
so that means every single post in this thread by any staff mod or user is pointless

Don't damage your brain over this bro, its fairly simple. If someone went back in time and changed it, you wouldn't know and none of this would bother you.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 05:08 AM, Painbringer wrote: -No Iraq war.
-No ISIS.
-Saddam Hussein still in power.

So are the Talibans as well and chances are Osama will plan something else, whatever it is.

It really goes both ways.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 08:20 AM, someaveragechap wrote: Obvious answer: a lot of dead people would actually be alive today.

Yes and more importantly, maybe patriotism wouldn't have become a base breaker to the point that we have idiots thinking it's an awful thing and even misquoting someone with "Patriotism is a last refuge for scoundrel" and other stupid shit. Anti-Americanism seems to be in rage these days.

I wonder if there's a t-shirt for that.

[JRob]

What if MLP never existed

[someaveragechap]

At 2/12/15 10:48 AM, Idiot-Finder wrote:
Yes and more importantly, maybe patriotism wouldn't have become a base breaker to the point that we have idiots thinking it's an awful thing and even misquoting someone with "Patriotism is a last refuge for scoundrel" and other stupid shit. Anti-Americanism seems to be in rage these days.

I wonder if there's a t-shirt for that.

I sometimes think Anti-Americanism is a legit religion in Europe.

At 2/12/15 11:44 AM, JRob wrote: What if MLP never existed

Bronies would have found another thing to go crazy over. It's a bit like Catcher in the Rye that way. Though I don't think any MLP fan has killed anyone because of Rainbow Dash telling them to be the best. Yet.

[JRob]

At 2/12/15 11:51 AM, Amaranthus wrote:

At 2/12/15 11:44 AM, JRob wrote: What if MLP never existed

What show would paedophiles and manchildren watch instead?

Probably some lame Belgian cartoon for kids

[Imprez]

At 2/12/15 05:08 AM, Painbringer wrote: -No Iraq war.
-No ISIS.
-Saddam Hussein still in power.

I don't know, maybe.

[Radaketor]

At 2/12/15 11:44 AM, JRob wrote: What if MLP never existed

World peace.

[orangebomb]

The definition of patriot wouldn't be tainted by all those one world, Whole Foods shopping "white trash" who thinks that so much as simply supporting your country (as in, supporting charities of our troops or even wearing an American Flag T-shirt) is akin to the worst kinds of heresy. God forbid if they have to live in a country that doesn't have basic freedoms of speech, press, religion and so on like America does, and any subversive thoughts would have them rounded up and sent to work camps or forced to clear out minefields by running full speed into them.

Al Queda would still be around plotting another terrorist attack, it wasn't like they weren't around before 9-11, the '93 WTC, the African embassies and the USS Cole bombings still happened after all. Not to mention that OBL would most likely be alive and would form their own version of ISIS in Afghanistan.

People seem to forget that altering one bad event doesn't mean that everything is going to work out fine, (Hitler's time travel exemption act trope is an example, look it up) there are just so many factors, coincidences and alternate history wank to consider that the average person can't fully understand.

[All-American-Badass]

It's hard to say since pretty much everything politically in the Western world the past 13 years has stemmed from 9-11. I'm for certain though that we wouldn't have the god awful TSA and police militarization wouldn't be nearly as much of an issue here in the US since there likely wouldn't be an Afghanistan and Iraq wars that we bring back a bunch of surplus equipment from and give to various police departments across the country.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 03:42 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

I wonder if there's a t-shirt for that.

are you serious? patriotism became galvanized by 9/11 if anything... despite the government spying on us, which nobody particularly liked..

That's why I refer to it as a base breaker.

however, though i am the minority here, i have good reason to hate patriotism. your country doesnt deserve you if they're a douchebag. would you have still followed america if they nuked japan for nogoddamn reason? oh wait...

Kind of irrelevant and went nowhere but to humor you a bit, Japan had it coming that time.

[JTBPreston]

If 9/11 never happened, having a plane hilariously crash into a building as comedy would always be funny.

But now it's happened, it never will be anymore. Just because Seth MacFarlane survived that tragedy thanks to oversleeping from a hangover doesn't mean he can make 9/11 a target of satire. It's distasteful.

[All-American-Badass]

At 2/12/15 04:56 PM, JTBPreston wrote: If 9/11 never happened, having a plane hilariously crash into a building as comedy would always be funny.

But now it's happened, it never will be anymore. Just because Seth MacFarlane survived that tragedy thanks to oversleeping from a hangover doesn't mean he can make 9/11 a target of satire. It's distasteful.

I mean he sorta did on the episode where Peter stole James Wood's identity and the one where Peter becomes overly patriotic.

[orangebomb]

At 2/12/15 05:12 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote: but it isnt. haters are outnumbered by fans.. not fans by haters.. the majority of america wanks to america no matter how much evil it has inflicted upon the rest of the world, or even upon itself.

There are plenty of people who'll wank to their own country as well, you see it during the Olympics, World Cup or anytime WW2 is mentioned. Not to mention that a lot of those countries did far worse things the 150 years or so than anything that America ever did. You might need to gain some serious perspective.

what for? attacking pearl harbor was nothing.. we couldve solved it though less barbaric means.. japan used no wmds on pearl harbor.. not even the kamikaze attacks on our fleet had nukes.. even then, they didnt bomb civilians like we did..

Seriously, we're still harping on this? Japan was still in the fight when Germany surrendered, and considering that they weren't keen on surrender, this was the only option of ending the war quickly. (All those surplus Purple Hearts was for the proposed invasion of the Japanese Mainland) plus, as devastating as the A-bombs were, the fire bombings of Tokyo and Dresden had more casualties, and let's not get into the wholescale slaughter that Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan committed in their respective reigns of terror in Europe and the East Asia.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 05:12 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

but it isnt. haters are outnumbered by fans.. not fans by haters.. the majority of america wanks to america no matter how much evil it has inflicted upon the rest of the world, or even upon itself.

Which in turn leads to a significant amount of backlash from those who starts assuming that all Americans thinks this way.

Kind of irrelevant and went nowhere but to humor you a bit, Japan had it coming that time.

what for? attacking pearl harbor was nothing.. we couldve solved it though less barbaric means.. japan used no wmds on pearl harbor.. not even the kamikaze attacks on our fleet had nukes.. even then, they didnt bomb civilians like we did..

Maybe so, even then to list a few:

Rape of Nanking, Unit 731, abuse of POWs, forced prostitution of women in Korea, and the bombing of Chongqing...oh wait.

[Decky]

I think the main difference in my life would be that I could watch reruns of Friends without seeing a panning shot of the twin towers and doing "They're gone now".

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 05:38 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

so? stay in the fight and not end it quick then. nukes continue to kill people through birth defects to this day.

Way to dodge the issue after you claimed that the Japanese didn't bomb the civilians like we did.

[stafffighter]

At 2/12/15 06:00 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 2/12/15 05:38 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

so? stay in the fight and not end it quick then. nukes continue to kill people through birth defects to this day.

Way to dodge the issue after you claimed that the Japanese didn't bomb the civilians like we did.

It was war, bad things were done, desperate times and measures, yadda yadda killing civilians is bad. There were projections that Japan could have kept holding out for years, costing who can say how many lives. While it's arguable how correct it was you can see why the nuclear option was taken.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 06:14 PM, stafffighter wrote:

It was war, bad things were done, desperate times and measures, yadda yadda killing civilians is bad. There were projections that Japan could have kept holding out for years, costing who can say how many lives. While it's arguable how correct it was you can see why the nuclear option was taken.

Exactly, when comparing the other option (Operation Downfall), the bombs were the lesser of the two evils. There was also another wave of invasion planned in 1946.

[stafffighter]

Ultimitly I think the strongest way to compare world war 2 and the nuclear option to the current situation is through the defining contract. The motivations for world war 2 were simple, bad men wanted to take the world and the rest of the world stopped them. No war since then, from the Korean conflict to Vietnam to either incident in Iraq has been that undivided in purpose. In a way I think people miss that and the seeking out of simple answers were there aren't and is where things get reactionary and lives are cost.
Of course there is one similarity. The nuclear option is much like the security measures, both domestic and worldwide, that have been taken since 9/11 in that the genie is staying out of the bottle. No country will every completely disarm out of fear of what others who might not could do and that's absolutely applicable to information.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 06:16 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

At 2/12/15 05:57 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 2/12/15 05:12 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

Which in turn leads to a significant amount of backlash from those who starts assuming that all Americans thinks this way.

even so, there are two points.. first, what other countries do to us doesnt justify us doing worse to them.. an eye for an eye and the world will be blind.. but this is a beheading for an eye... which is even more monstrous..

Now you're throwing out some random expressions that didn't hold much relevance to the discussion. Care to at least clarify what you're posting?

which brings us to the second.. they dont have the power we do. they cant wipe us off the map with a handwave like we can..

What?

Maybe so, even then to list a few:

Rape of Nanking, Unit 731, abuse of POWs, forced prostitution of women in Korea, and the bombing of Chongqing...oh wait.

so? i'm not much for history but i cant see any nation but the united states ending humankind's existence at any point in time..

Yes, thank you for admitting that you don't know enough about what went on during the war after trying to paint the U.S. in a worst light than the Japanese were at the time.

well, maybe the romans and their plagues, but.. well, nobody knew quite how disease worked yet to be fair..

Relevance?

soviet russia came closest after that.. but.. we never got around to going to war with them formally, thank goodness..

There were speculations that the Soviets were going to take part in the invasion as well, not sure to what extent but the fact that they took over Manchuria toward the end of the war shown some possible signs.

the japanese, and al qaeda after them, may have been less than savory.. but we're a million times worse...

How so?

american soldiers have been known to rape the places they occupy too... like in vietnam i think it were..

Which is still a much smaller incidence compared to what the Japanese used to do. Granted it doesn't make it right but to embellish the info doesn't exactly help your argument.

and we drone bombed al qaeda without any regard for if it was a terrorist or a legitimate farmer standing there.. true, we regretted our mistakes afterwards, but does that excuse them? no.

Compared to blatant massacre of the civilians in the city and the hospitals by some countries? Could have been worse.

At 2/12/15 06:18 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

At 2/12/15 06:00 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 2/12/15 05:38 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

so? stay in the fight and not end it quick then. nukes continue to kill people through birth defects to this day.

Way to dodge the issue after you claimed that the Japanese didn't bomb the civilians like we did.

not with nukes or chemical weapons as far as i'm aware they didnt.. nazi germany used chemicals, but japan.. nothing i'd classify as a wmd as far as i can tell.. so no continued casualties after the war ended.

Which would you rather have, this or the war going on for few more years due to the invasion?

[dabatdino]

if 911 didnt happen.... WW3 happens :OOOOO jkjk probably less terrorist attacks or less muslim hate and shit like that? could be a possibility though.

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 06:37 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

At 2/12/15 06:14 PM, stafffighter wrote:

At 2/12/15 06:00 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 2/12/15 05:38 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

It was war, bad things were done, desperate times and measures, yadda yadda killing civilians is bad. There were projections that Japan could have kept holding out for years, costing who can say how many lives. While it's arguable how correct it was you can see why the nuclear option was taken.

no i really cant.. no matter how many millitary lives it cost us, japan couldnt possibly have broken through our lines.. we had the upper hand in fleet production.. no matter how much they kamikaze'd us, we just replaced it..

Except it still doesn't change the fact that the Japanese were preparing for the invasion which would have led to even higher death rate than what the two bombs would go on to bring.

sure we'd be just another certain futurama character there, but.. well.. does it matter? military is expendable by nature. sure, life is life.. but.. i dont see how being ready to justify yourself in killing other people who dont particularly wish to die makes them automatically better than us civilians.. if anything it makes them worse..

Way to go off tangent.

defense is defense.. so they hit pearl harbor, so bleeding sad for you all.. when they next strike an american target, fight off the perpetrators then back off..

Then if they hit again, what happens? Do you really think that's how the way things works? Do you honestly believe that?

roosevelt's administration had the right idea in the beginning... the other countries... let them defend themselves.

And if they end up falling, what happens next?

[Idiot-Finder]

At 2/12/15 06:56 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

dont even try to pass this off as irrelevant.

I'm sorry but the problem it is irrelevant since it hardly had anything to do with what you're getting at in this discussion.

Maybe so, even then to list a few:

Yes, thank you for admitting that you don't know enough about what went on during the war after trying to paint the U.S. in a worst light than the Japanese were at the time.

i know enough. i know that the world thought us great for helping them against a common enemy despite that we're no better.

Actually, we were better than the Japanese at the time seeing we didn't commit the level of atrocities they had all the way to even before the second Sino-Japanese War.

There were speculations that the Soviets were going to take part in the invasion as well, not sure to what extent but the fact that they took over Manchuria toward the end of the war shown some possible signs.

does it even matter what might have been?

It does if you think the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki is the worst it can get.

How so?

because the world hated them, but the world looks up to us. this is why cops are worse than criminals too, if not for that one issue, they'd be exactly the same.

You said, "the japanese, and al qaeda after them, may have been less than savory.. but we're a million times worse..."

Please be more specific, how so?

Which is still a much smaller incidence compared to what the Japanese used to do. Granted it doesn't make it right but to embellish the info doesn't exactly help your argument.

uh, but nobody liked the people who raped in japan.. our soldiers were still portrayed as heroes...

Care to explain where you get that info from? Even if it does happen, the incidence is still miniscule compared to what the Japanese did in China alone.

Compared to blatant massacre of the civilians in the city and the hospitals by some countries? Could have been worse.

its not the number of casualties, but the agony caused without consent.. i'd imagine a hellfire missile is far worse than an ied in that regard..

See Rape of Nanking, Unit 731, and bombing of Chongqing.

At 2/12/15 06:18 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

At 2/12/15 06:00 PM, Idiot-Finder wrote:

At 2/12/15 05:38 PM, mysticvortex13 wrote:

Which would you rather have, this or the war going on for few more years due to the invasion?

considering birth defects never end, but war does, i'm inclined to go with war.

So according to you, the invasion of Japan where the death rates of both sides, even more so on the Japanese civilians you have been whining about would have been the better option, okay.