The terrorists wanted to strike US foreign policy and globalization.

Yes, and their stated strategy in this, which they announced years in advance, was to draw us into an endless, unwinnable war.

History fail.

Religion? Don't be ridiculous. We occupied their countries, didn't let them import medicine, bombed their factories, and killed their children for decades. Then they came and blew our buildings up, like they told us they were gonna if we didn't leave. And you want to talk about religion?

Stupid fucking militant atheists. It's always religion with you, just like it's always race with the racists. Shut the fuck up.

To paraphrase you, showing weakness (by misguided action) has in fact been interpreted as a sign of weakness by the world.

Ten years of war didn't kill bin Laden. Two helicopters full of Special Forces did it in half an hour, in Pakistan no less.

It's that USA went from being a respected member of the world community to a nation hated even among its allies. A nation that things it owns the whole world, can torture other country's ppls, can force them to act in ways it wants, and that is in everyone else's face.

Are you fucking daft? That has been the normal state of affairs for decades.

Damn right, fuck them. The idea that it's morally acceptable to attack a country that never engaged in hostilities with yours is abhorrent.

[citation needed]

I just love it when people who claim to be Liberal and Democrats (I don't mean that in the narrow US political party sense, I mean Liberal as in philosophy and Democrat as in Democratic) jump in and defend a Fascist dictatorship ruled over by a mass murdering psychopath

Can you quote where the OP did that? I'm not seeing it.

Don't be stupid, they're fucking numbers. Have you never had a set of files named "date-foo.bar"? Or "foo.bar.date"?

You pump more money into the economy during the process, which creates jobs

No it doesn't.

Thank you for your thoughtful and well-written post, Mr. Anonymous Coward With No Numbers.

After all, open source was created to free people from proprietary code and people telling them what they can't do.

Open source wasn't "created." It was a relabeling of other people's work.

Free software was created to advance the four freedoms.

Contributing back takes money

Eh?

and can be counter-productive for the community too - especially if it's introduces lots of buggy or bad code.

There are all kinds of ways one can contribute to free software. Can you draw? Can you write? Can you report a bug or request a feature in a coherent fashion? Can you give support?

If you truly believe in open source, you should let anyone to decide what they do with the code. Some will contribute back, and those will be good contributions. Then some won't, nothing is lost. The same is why I think BSD license is much better GPL - if you truly believe in freedom, you let everyone to decide themselves.

Aw shit. I got BSD-trolled! Forget it.

Yeah. The idea that if you wanted to change the way the workspace appeared and behaved, you'd look in "Workspace Appearance and Behavior" is just so...

Oh wait, no. It's bloody obvious.