Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Structural Damage to the Financial District

Posted by michael on from the engineering-challenge dept.

An anonymous submitter sent in a couple of links to damage reports on the World Trade Center complex - a nifty 3D map of the center and surrounding areas showing which buildings have been damaged or destroyed, and a discussion of how exactly they're going to excavate the below-ground area of the complex considering that it is below sea level.

1 of 316 comments (clear)

  1. Absent logic. by MarkusQ · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Your response illustrates perfectly the sort of "emotional reasoning" to which I am objecting. For example:

    Um, there's a difference between 6,000 people dying in accidents and 6,000 people being intentionally murdered (not to mention the economic cost).

    I would argue that there is little or no difference to the people who die. I for one, do not expect to have fundamentally different feelings about my death based on whether if it is brought about by a drunk driver or a terrorist. In fact, I expect to be dead.

    To the living (or perhaps in this context it would be better to say "To the yet to die") there is, I would agree, a great deal of difference. I am for example, far, far more likely to be killed by a drunk driver than by a terrorist (assuming of course that a smoker doesn't get me with second hand smoke first). Furthermore, there are many more steps I can take to protect myself from these more likely threats, and almost none of them involve letting the media work my up to a blood lust so that I sanction more senseless killing. But I doubt that was your point.

    Just out of curiosity, how many have to die for you to think it's important? Another 10 jumbo jets? We know the terrorists are actively trying to get nuclear weapons. It should be pretty clear that they don't care how much damage they do or how many people they kill. How many need to die? Would a nuke killing 5 million people be enough for you?

    This seems to me utter blather. I object to using the deaths of some innocents to justify killing more innocents; you "rebut" by asking how many more people I want to die, as if I were the one screaming for blood. In case you still don't get it:

    I don't think killing innocent people is a good idea.

    I have no objection to apprehending the culprits, including their support staff, charging them with murder and, if they are convicted, imprisoning or executing them to prevent further atrocities. This is a far cry from declaring "war on Afganastan" or "nuking 5 million people."

    Guess what -- sometimes there are more important things in life than how soon you get your shiny new video game.

    I have no idea where this came from. In point of fact, I have never owned a video game, shiny or dull, new or used. And even if I had, I expect that I would still object to being badgered into attacking a nation of several million poor people on the basis of the alleged actions of one wealthy nut case and his misguided followers.

    -- MarkusQ