I get the memes and all that, but am I wrong in thinking it's a tad more complex? In any context, I can't help but regret such loss of life. As I think about it, though, I guess we wrought all manner of havoc in the Middle East, and we didn't spare civilians, so why should we expect any different. All the horrific things we did there... I see clearly why it happened. I just can't see myself supporting such an action. If they flew planes first into government buildings (which I know they tried) or military bases I could understand better. I just can't in good conscience support either what we did there or what happened here. I also won't say the US didn't deserve it; we totally did, but was actually doing it the correct move? How is it entirely different from going out and shooting random finance bros or billionaires. Sure they deserve it, sure it'll make us feel better, but I don't think it'd bring about real change. It's the argument against adventurism. And it helped fast-track surveillance fascism here, though I don't blame them for that, that was our own ghoul-ass politicians and scared people.
I guess this could be a common sentiment, and people just like memeing, which is all right, I suppose, so long as it doesn't get you in prison for making an ill-advised joke.
EDIT: I guess I still have some pacifist brainworms. I keep wanting our "good guys" not to use such violence, when comparably it is a drop in the bucket of the violence used against them. Also, of course, the responsibility for what happened to the US is lies within themselves. I do regret the loss of life, but I need to remember to keep in mind the many many many more lives lost due to US imperialism. Thanks for the replies!
I think it was Michael S. Judge who talked about 9/11 and October seven when he talked about aaron bushnell. He talks about how abstraction drags away real things into the void. He mentions the deaths in the twin towers. He says all that is converted to something the american elite use for their ends. A signifier to be deployed. It became a claim to what was to be done by the west. They became draped around the project that was to occupy iraq or Afghanistan or palestine or lebanon or syria.
False flags to further the agenda of the west isn't new.
Like Reichstag fire or tonkin, they happen cause it was set it stone to further capital's powers.
Even if they aren't really false flags, if they are real incidents carried out by political actors against the ruling class : like oct 7 or harper's ferry.
Was the harpers raid or oct 7 right thing to do?
I mean those or 9/11 are not really comparable beyond some parameters.
These attacks on towers were set in stone.
It isn't some adventurism just as reichstag fire isn't. It was political theater.
At this point or then america or americans never cared about the attacks. It was a emblem to further exceptionalism. Still is.
Now saying uh think about all the loss of life, only ever considers the americans and puts it through a context where this happened in some vaccum and america was some victim.
I'll finally put this in a further different context. There was attacks in kashmir months back. Everyone is enamored in the political theater. Broadly everyone was condemning the incident and mourning. Now mourning the people is fine. But to portray themselves as unattached victims is bullshit. That was india's fault and action. "But the victims" is just a way to obscure from what kashmiris endure.
Anyways 4$ a pound.