Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by ZeroGravitas 83 days ago
> After 9/11, there's no world in which any attack on the US homeland, however small or local, is met with anything other than overwhelming retribution.

Yes remember when they invaded Saudi Arabia? That taught everyone an important lesson on the consequences of terrorism on American soil.
2 comments
close04 83 days ago
The suggestion that Cuba would risk that for no obvious benefit is weird. Some wildcards in Cuba might be doing this unsanctioned. But any Cuban sanctioned/sponsored attack is very unrealistic.

Cuba is the easiest target the US could have. It's very close to the US and very far from any potential ally. The US has never shied away from committing acts of extreme cruelty, well into terrorist or war crime territory. From dropping nuclear bombs on civilians, phosphorus bombs, drone bombing innocent people, schools, hospitals, institutionalized torture, etc. even with far weaker reasons.

There is no scenario where a direct attack on the US wouldn't lead to an extremely violent response in complete disregard of Cuban lives. And get away with it.

link
decimalenough 83 days ago
The hijackers were Saudi nationals, but the operation was in no way sponsored by the Saudi state, which is a staunch US ally. Which is why the US proceeded to (attempt to) flatten Afghanistan instead.
link
xorcist 83 days ago
> the operation was in no way sponsored by the Saudi state,

We do not know this. There are plentiful evidence to suggest direct involvement of the state itself, and the bin Ladin family is certainly hard to untangle from the Saudi state. That is just from what we can know from unclassified sources.

link
orochimaaru 83 days ago
There wasn’t anything to flatten in Afghanistan. They were coming off a 20 yr civil war.
link
temp8830 83 days ago
Proxy war. And that's an awful lot of years and billions spent on flattening nothing, don't you think?
link
pengaru 83 days ago
Donating fuel to terrorists on the other side of the planet isn't cheap
link
bparsons 83 days ago
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2024/05/september-...
link
jacquesm 83 days ago
> Which is why the US proceeded to (attempt to) flatten Afghanistan instead.

It seems to have made things better for the Taliban.

link
cucumber3732842 83 days ago
The current Taliban are an almost completely different organization despite there being continuity from then to now. A good comparison point is the church of England in 1520 vs 1620.
link
bluGill 83 days ago
It is a very different taliban
link