Quote:
Originally Posted by mattiz28  it was not justified to kill thousands of INNOCENT people...
tell the little kids that lost their parents in the attack that 9/11 was justified...your a f.cking retard...move to europe |
Oh for f.ck's sake.
I didn't say I thought it was justified, I said that the guys who did believed it was justified (there was a clear motive behind it). They didn't just randomly attack for no reason (or because "they hate our freedoms"). You said there was no justification, but there was, the justification was not valid, but there was a justification. When someone says there was a justification, that doesn't mean that it was a valid one.
Next time don't go crazy and try to actually understand what you read.
In fact I'll summarize this whole case for you:
1. You said that the US was attacked without justification
2. I asked you if you really believed that they attacked without justification. I didn't say I thought the justification was valid or that I believed it.
3. northern jumped the gun and accused me of thinking the reasoning made 9/11 ok.
4. I said I didn't and gave info that shows why there is so much anti-US sentiment in the middle east.
5. Northern said that I did say it, and ignored the rest of my post.
6. I repeated that I didn't, and that just because there was a justification doesn't mean it was a valid one (Al-Qaeda believed it was valid).
7. northern just said I didn't make sense and gave up.
8. You apparently ignored everything and posted the same sh.t he did.
I'll even give you a simple example:
A kid punches his classmate in the face.
The teacher asked him why he did it.
The kid said it was because he didn't like the other kid.
Now the kid had a justification of why he punched his classmate.
Was the justification valid?
No.
So even though there was a justification (which the kid believed was right), it wasn't valid and therefore the action was not justified.