or Connect
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › The Cat Lounge › Should the World Trade Centers be Rebuilt?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Should the World Trade Centers be Rebuilt?

post #1 of 25
Thread Starter 
Sitting here thinking about the aftermath and rubble, I've decided to make a poll to see what everyone thinks. Do you think they should rebuild the World Trade Centers or tear what's left down and make a park or memorial to the victims?

Personally I believe they should rebuild them. The World Trade Center was everything the United States stood for and more. To level it and make a park in memory of all the victims is like a victory to the terrorists, a permanent "graveyard" if you will. If we built them back up again, it would signify the perserverence of the U.S. and once built, would be like flipping two middle fingers standing high saying to the terrorists "f*** you".
post #2 of 25
financial considerations aside, because I have NO idea how much it would cost to rebuild (upwards of a billion dollars I'm sure)I absolutely believe they should be rebuilt.

for all of the reasons that Donna said.
post #3 of 25
I have mixed feelings on this subject as I was part of the first bombing and remember what it was like and remember when those F***** said that they didn't care how long it would take but they would bring both of those buildings down. They succeeded. I know people that worked in the buildings and I actually have a friend who worked there at the first bombing and lost her job because she refused to go back into the building. For these reasons, I don't believe they should rebuild. On the other hand, the towers were absolutely a beautiful site. I saw them for the last time when we were landing in Newark actually on an emergency landing (lost our hydrolic lines while the landing gear was going down and lost the steering for our landing and for the approach to out gate and not knowing if our landing gear was locked so we had to be towed in and this was after we took off from my destination 4 hours late. My friends and family were waiting for me at the cat show and actually held up the show until I got there.) I can't picture Wall Street without them. I've worked in lower Manhattan most of my life and loved it especially when we use to go out for lunch or a drink after a bad day. It won't be the same but I will be back there remembering all of my old good times. So, I have mixed feelings but will be there no matter what they decide to do about it.

post #4 of 25
Our World Trade Center here in Portland spans a couple blocks, and is not towers but a series of buildings joined by skybridges.
I believe something should be rebuilt, not a park, but not the towers either...maybe something less "impressive" like our Trade Center here in Oregon?
post #5 of 25
I do think they should rebuild but maybe in a different area in Manhattan (if possible). I just think there should be some kind of memorial. If they do rebuild in the same location maybe they can make a memorial in the front or entryway of the building.
post #6 of 25
I also think they should rebuild, but I like Sabras idea of building it in another place, or if they do build in the same place, having a memorial there also.
post #7 of 25
I agree with what Debby said.
post #8 of 25
I don't know if they should rebuild. I think they should make the old one into a memorial site, just like what they did @ in Oklahoma City. I think that it would be a nice memorial for the victim's & their families/friends. Maybe rebuild somewhere else in the city & also have a memorial at the entrance as well. Hard decision, but a good poll!
post #9 of 25
Too early to make a call on this issue. I think the thrust now should be to rid the world of the threat that caused this tragedy.
post #10 of 25
My opinion is that they should not rebuild. It is obvously a target for terrorists, and even though some think it should be rebuilt to prove a point....look at how many lives are lost. To me it is not worth it.

Build a memorial instead.
post #11 of 25
I don't think it should be rebuilt: this is a place where thousands of people died, it should be a place or rememberance, of quietness. A memorial should be built, or a park, where people would go and could rememember. This is a place that must make us think and pray. I think it's a place where we must have silence in sign of respect.

I also think that gigantic towers like that should never have been built because they are impossible to evacuate in time. Think about it, the bigger they are the more likely targets they are. If this area had been an area with buildings of normal height it would never had been chosen for a terrorist target.

post #12 of 25
I agree with Anne Claire. Yes it really was an amazing sight but think about the fact that there would have been less victims had the building been smaller.
post #13 of 25
given the price of real estate in Manhattan, I think it's pretty unlikely the area will be turned into a park. But I think of, say, Rockefeller Center, with the open space (think of all those piccys of the ice rink and the tree at the holidays) but also with office buildings. Perhaps some kind of combination, with a memorial on the first floor and office space up above? Though it may be a very long time before we get around to doing it . . . Who owns the land, anyway?
post #14 of 25
First of all let me say I voted to "rebuild". I agree with Donna. Not to rebuild would be giving in to our fear. The property is owned (I believe they said on NBC) by the Donald of Trump [Donald Trump]. He was on late last nite saying that if the citizens want it; he would donate the site for a park similar to Oklahoma City, but he also inferred that he thought that buildings like the WTC are part of what Manhattan is "all about".
post #15 of 25
by all means we should rebuild. If for no other reason to show the world America can and will rise above the ashes and overcome this evil known as terrorism. That we are trully One Nation United
post #16 of 25
I firmly believe the site of the New York tragedy should become a park, in memory of the victims. Skyscrapers are fire traps, as has been shown time and again over the past 100 years. Fire marshals have railed against such death-trap structures unsuccessfully. Corporations insist such structures are necessary symbols of economic might. You may judge for yourselves which rationale seems more humane and sensible.

Here is a cartoon which was published shortly after the Triangle Waist Company fire at New York in 1911. Please contemplate the dangers inherent in so-called "high rise" buildings.

post #17 of 25
I appreciate your informing us of this decision. Well, I guess symbolism has once again triumphed over human life. One can only hope better protocols for evacuation are developed. A survivor from one of the towers described firefighters near exhaustion from carrying oxygen tanks and hoses up those many flights of stairs. That single anecdote speaks volumes about the safety of skyscrapers.

post #18 of 25
Wow, I can't believe that there are plans to re-build so soon!
post #19 of 25
You know, TipTop, you are exactly right! To that person, unfortunately, to them, it's all about the money & not the poor, innocent people laying under that rubble. You'd think out of respect, they would just lay off on the money issue & remember the people who have lost their lives!
post #20 of 25
I think that something should be rebuilt on that site to show the world that we will not be forced to move or let them feel they succeeded. The buildings were insured and since we were not in a war at the time, the insurance money will be used to rebuild. The plans, I have heard, will not be for the building to look the same, be quite as high, etc. which is probably a good thing as it may be too painful for people to consider working there - knowing so many people died. However, if it is a lower building, with a memorial park surrounding it, it may prove to be a nice tribute to the people who lost their lives. I agree that it would not be feasable for the owners of the property to turn it into a park - reality is that there is no New York property available and the expense would be too great - New York City itself has been in financial distress for years and could not afford to buy the property and maintain it as a park. I think with thought and careful consideration, it could hold a little for everyone. Since we will not have a say in the actual decision, the best thing we can do is offer our prayers and wishes to the victims and their families-
post #21 of 25
The current sentiment seems to be that the New York skyline will be made whole again. I can't say that I disagree with that feeling.
post #22 of 25
I think they should rebuild but not high rise buildings. Some kind of buildings that would be easier to evacuate, built to withstand most natural disasters but still be attractive to the city. I think a memorial should be built but not where they died. Somewhere where it would be considered safer and in a place easy for visitors to come pay tribute.
post #23 of 25
You've hit the nail on the head, with the best idea of "compromise" (in the finest sense of the word) I've heard. My objection to rebuilding is based upon the well-known dangers inherent in skyscrapers. Your suggestion of rebuilding, but with more modest structures, is spot on.

My mother lived in a high-rise retirement home; and one day I was awakened by my housemate with the news that a fire had occurred at that building, resulting in fatalities. Thankfully, deadly products of combustion were confined to one storey of the building — and my mother (along with nearly all residents) was safe. To the everlasting credit of the building's management, no fire-safety violations were discovered: all fire exits were easily accessible, built-in firefighting systems worked perfectly, firefighters had ready access to all parts of the building, et cetera. (The fatalities were confined to the one apartment which had burned and were caused by smoke inhalation.)

Of course, a vertically-gigantic building is another matter; and issuance of building permits for such structures is, in my mind, immoral.

post #24 of 25
the problem of course is the cost of real estate. When people can't build out they build up, so the most desireable locations, like Manhattan, tend to grow highrises. I guess it all comes down to greed . . .
post #25 of 25
This is what happens when I reply to one thing before reading all my email, because it always seems like there's something further down that applies!

This is a link to something posted on the web by one of my mail art buddies. Parts of it are a little hard to read (font color too close to background color) but about 3/4 of the way down is an artist's rendering of a plan for rebuilding the WTC that might be interesting to some of you

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Cat Lounge
TheCatSite.com › Forums › General Forums › The Cat Lounge › Should the World Trade Centers be Rebuilt?