3 ms·

I disagree with the foreign policy and ridiculous TSA procedures post 9/11. That said, the more appropriate comparison is OKC bombing, since both incidents inv

I disagree with the foreign policy and ridiculous TSA procedures post 9/11. That said, the more appropriate comparison is OKC bombing, since both incidents involved domestic terrorism.

owenmarshall 15y ago
>That said, the more appropriate comparison is OKC bombing, since both incidents involved domestic terrorism. I'm not sure it is the most appropriate comparison. As pointed out in comments above: * The percentage of people killed in the Norway attacks was larger than the percentage killed in 9/11 (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2816569 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2816569) * The homicide rate in Norway is astronomically low; these attacks accounted for two years worth of homicides (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2816911 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2816911) Arguably, our post-9/11 actions occurred as a response to 9/11. Thus, if we are discussing Norway's response, we should compare to a terrorist attack on the same relative scale; and, as above, it looks like 9/11 may be a good benchmark after all.
- jamesteow 15y ago
  For me, it's less about the numbers and more about who did it and the complexity. The coordination involved in hijacking multiple planes. The symbolic effect of destroying and damaging icons. The foreign organization and leader who has a history against the U.S due to the country's involvement in the Middle East. The reason why OKC makes more sense is because the damage was caused from within by their own citizens, which potentially has a different scope as to what should be done next.