Texas Explorer (1000+ posts) Tue Jan-13-09 10:18 AM
Original message
Where was the U.S. military on 9/11; who was in charge; and
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=125x231419 Edited on Tue Jan-13-09 11:06 AM by Texas Explorer
why did they fail so miserably? I don't care how you slice it, there simply is no excuse for the epic fail of our military on that fateful day.
I assume tex wanted us to either:
a. Shoot down the jets.
b. Bomb the **** out of the taliban in early 2001
c. killed Saddam the first time around.
d. all of the above.
For the record, I was on leave on Sept 11, 2001. On Sept 15th 2001 I was already headed to the middle east.
lulu in NC (1000+ posts) Tue Jan-13-09 10:40 AM
Response to Original message
1. I assume stand down orders. It's not an excuse, but it's a reason. nt
We were on stand down orders because, of course, Bush knew. Or maybe that we were not in a war at the time.
seemslikeadream (1000+ posts) Tue Jan-13-09 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
2. Wasn't it 75 minutes they had?
Edited on Tue Jan-13-09 01:04 PM by seemslikeadream
Where were they?
Kind of like you. Wondering what the hell was going on. After the second plane hit, WE knew it was war.
tetedur (232 posts) Tue Jan-13-09 03:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Touching History didn't answer my questions.
I wasn't impressed with under 4 pages of widely spaced footnotes either. Those footnotes tell you the author basically used the 9/11 Commission book, watched videos and exchanged emails with a few people. After reading this self-contradictory book all of my questions remain and I have a few more.
However, the book was fully endorsed by General Richard B. Myers Chairman JCS, Ralph E. Eberhart, General USAF (ret.) Former Commander, NORAD and Aerospace Defense Command, and forwarded by Gen. Larry Arnold who later admitted he was wrong in his testimony to the Commission.
Here's an oped in the New York Times by 9/11 Commission staff members,JOHN FARMER, JOHN AZZARELLO and MILES KARA, who say the book told stories that were not true.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/opinion/14farmer.html...
They say it better than I can.
boloboffin (1000+ posts) Tue Jan-13-09 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Because you have only one correct answer for your questions.
You point out that the Hutchison story is untrue. You even cite the New York Times editorial showing that Hutchison's story could not be true, because Hutchison had not even taken off before 93 crashed.
But that doesn't tell you that there was no way anyone could have stopped those planes. That tells you that it's all lies and you can feel free to believe what you wanted, that the military allowed these attacks to happen knowingly.
That's not a commitment to truth. And Sweeney's book is more than this one story.
Hell, I heard the military was really the ones flying the jets, remote control. The people on board are just fictional persons, planted in the records by the CIA. All the 'sopposed' survivers and family members are nothing more than paid CIA/NSA actors.
