Rath said:
richardhutnik said:
dtewi said:
I don't know why he'd use the change 9/11 had as the analogy...
|
9/11 got compared to Pearl Harbor. Is that a good analogy? One act was a declaration of war by a sovereign nation, while the other was an act done by a bunch of punk individuals in a network. What is normally seen as a criminal act was turned into an act of war, and launched America on a path of foreign policy that has hinder it, costing over 1 trillion in dollars and costing an lot in credibility.
So, ask me which is worse here. Do you want to say, "but 9/11 did impact foreign policy the way Pearl Harbor did"? Fine, then you can say the oil spill impacted economic and environmental foreign policy in a similar scope.
|
To be fair, punk individuals in a network provided safety by a sovereign nation.
|
And it marked a shift historically in the nature of war, and a post-super power world. There is problems if we can't use events like 9/11 in comparison to other events. As I see it, Katrina is comparible to 9/11. Katrina could of also been prevented had more been done to fix the levies. The impact on lives of Katrina were were than those of 9/11. America lost a city due to Katrina.
And now, one has to wonder how how many lives will be adversely impacted by the oil spill.
