damn, WTC won't be re-built as it was "before"

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

azazyel

Diamond Member
Oct 6, 2000
5,872
1
81


<< they should level the whole thing. bury bin Laden right in the middle, and then build the biggest friggin' skyscraper imaginable right over his grave. every floor should have a Mcdonald's, toysR'us, target, gap, and one of those cell-phone-huts you see in the mall. just to piss them all off. >>



LOL

I also like the glass dome idea!+
 

LiQiCE

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,911
0
0
I think sortof as a way of saying "up yours" to the terrorists the WTC should be rebuilt in all its glory ... The WTC defines the New York skyline, and without it the skyline becomes as plain and boring as any other city in the world ... I think it would be a much better idea to rebuild another set of sky scrapers obviously with better technology and safety to prevent another disaster.
 

bigredguy

Platinum Member
Mar 18, 2001
2,457
0
0
i hope some memorial is constucted eitheron the land itself or in the replacement building.
but for those of you who said arm the building, that is such a rediculous statement, so you can shoot down the plane, so instead of plowing into that bulding it will be blown up and the debris will go hurtling into other buildings and possibly even doing more damage. and would you willing shoot down your own people for only being susupected to be overtaken by terrorists.
 

Namuna

Platinum Member
Jun 20, 2000
2,435
1
0
Those Towers were a symbol of American Economic might.

If we don't re-build as big (if not bigger), then we admit that Terrorism won.

30 years ago those buildings were built to withstand a direct hit from a 707...30 years ago!!. Even when the 747/757 hit them last week, those towers STILL didn't collapse. It was ONLY because of the jet fuel.

What happened was a 'One-shot' deal, NOBODY will be able to do that maneuver again because we know about it now.

Re-Build them BIG. Re-Build them STRONG. Put a BIG ASS AMERICAN Flagpole at the top.
 

Aihyah

Banned
Apr 21, 2000
2,593
0
0
would YOU feel safe working in a 110 story building after this?


i'm not safe in any building now considering how nutty these freaks are. i'm sure all future buildings will have better escape routes.. wider staircases etc. and maybe even the ability to withstand another plane crash. they were designed to survive a plane crash, which they did pretty well, but the designers did not account well enough for the fuel. i'm sure 30 years later a slightly better solution could be made.
 

DDad

Golden Member
Oct 9, 1999
1,668
0
0
". bury bin Laden right in the middle, and then build the biggest friggin' skyscraper imaginable right over his grave."

Close, but no cigar- I'd place his carcass in part of the sewage system- everytime you "do a bodily function", it would be on his grave.......
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,676
5,239
136
I was listening to an interesting interview on NPR the other day with this guy who said the twin towers did not make much sense from a city planning point of view. As it was already stated, you could build several smaller buildings for the price of the two towers.

More importantly, these two big buildings concentrated things too much. Aside from the enormous infrastructure needed to support them, it made too many people needing to commute to an already overcrowded place. Getting into Manhattan is a nightmare, and you have to build and maintain a gamut of bridges and tunnels just to provide access. His theory was to spread this space over the NYC area, not just in Manhattan (like the Bronx and Brooklyn, etc. ) to stimulate economic development in these areas, and ease commuting. This would also avoid making one giant, vulnerable target that would be begging to be hit again (even if you kill all the islamic terrorists, the next psychos will go for it) Strategically this makes sense as well.

Personally, I'd like to see the towers again because they were so cool, although we must be careful about creating another giant Acheilles' Heel. It should also be noted that this guys perspective was that the original towers marred the beautiful NY skyline, for whatever that is worth. He had some convincing and insightful points however.
 

Bluga

Banned
Nov 28, 2000
4,315
0
0


<< 'm not safe in any building now considering how nutty these freaks are. i'm sure all future buildings will have better escape routes.. wider staircases etc. and maybe even the ability to withstand another plane crash. they were designed to survive a plane crash, which they did pretty well, but the designers did not account well enough for the fuel. i'm sure 30 years later a slightly better solution could be made. >>



who would thought about plane smashing into buildings?
 

OSUdrunk

Senior member
Apr 21, 2001
766
0
0
I think the best solution would be to build them to look exactly as they standed before. That would should the terrorists that they haven't won, that we will end up on top. They are a symbol of America.

How about if, after they're built, bin Laden is pushed off the top of one of them?
 



<< Americans said they are "not feared by terroist", but doesn't WTC represent the economic power of US? >>



No, It was a pair of very large buildings
 

Electric Amish

Elite Member
Oct 11, 1999
23,578
1
0
I'm not afraid to work in a 110 story building.

The problem is that NY, Manhattan specifically, is the center of the industry. Nobody is going to want an office building anywhere other than the center of commerce. That's why the offices were there in the first place. Yeah, that makes for a crowded metropolis, but that's what happens when all the "important" traffic goes through one tiny little island. :)

amish
 

Aihyah

Banned
Apr 21, 2000
2,593
0
0
who would thought about plane smashing into buildings?


the original designers thought there was a chance of accidental collision because of their hieght. so they kinda designed for that possibility, they just didn't account for the fuel.
 

BigJohnKC

Platinum Member
Aug 15, 2001
2,448
1
0
WIth the land valued so high, there is no way they'll build just a memorial. I'd like to see the world's tallest building on that spot. With construction techniques the way they are today, we could build something there that could not be taken down by a plane. It would be a symbol of defiance - will not back down.
 

Lioness

Member
Jul 27, 2001
199
0
0



<< they should level the whole thing. bury bin Laden right in the middle, and then build the biggest friggin' skyscraper imaginable right over his grave. every floor should have a Mcdonald's, toysR'us, target, gap, and one of those cell-phone-huts you see in the mall. just to piss them all off." >>



Although I must admit the middle finger buildings did put a smile on my face.

And unfortunately Bin Laden will not be buried there.

IMHO: In rememberance to all those who died and bodies who were never recovered (basically their grave), I would like to see a nice park with a statue inscribing all their names. This would allow every American to pay their respects when they visit NYC, as well as, allow the opportunity for those families who never had the opportunity to bury their loved one who lost their life in the WTC a place to pray.

I sure wouldn't want a building, on any of my loved ones grave. Nor on any Americans grave.
IMHO The value of that piece of real estate doesn't compare to the value of lost lives.





 

Xzaver

Golden Member
Dec 1, 1999
1,927
1
0


<< damn, WTC won't be re-built as it was "before" >>



No it won't be , now we will be putting SAMS on the roof.
 

Lioness

Member
Jul 27, 2001
199
0
0
I think we should bury Bin Laden with all the women he buried alive. These women will make sure he never rests in peace. :)
 

Rogue

Banned
Jan 28, 2000
5,774
0
0
Any new WTC style towers built there will have to be manned by the military to run a SAM site for protection. Thing is, this attack is old now, they'll think of something more vile and level that at us.
 

Aihyah

Banned
Apr 21, 2000
2,593
0
0
i don't think they'd need sams, the terrorists have used up this means of attack, element of surprise is gone, its on to their next strategy.
 

Unclemo

Banned
Apr 1, 2000
967
0
0
No question that we have to build two towers taller and more beautiful than anything. They need to represent our economic power and quest for growth and strength. If we don't build em back we lose and look weak. Put the memorial in the lobby with all the victums' names. The victums will be honored by the strength and beauty of the towers. We lose if they never go back up. As nice as a memorial sounds, it is just plan dumb to put a bunch of grass and trees in the middle of wall street where the worlds financial structures meet. The financial district represents capitalism and the American Dream and needs to be rebuilt. It is not a slap or any amount of disrespect toward the victums. It honors their American Dreams and love for the opportunities of their country.