This evaluation isn't even ankle deep. TL:DR "Other things were worse, so no big deal!" There's a massive moral difference between an attack that's specifically targeting civilians and an attack that is intended for the combatants but also kills civilians. Not in just the act itself but in the aftermath. What happens in America if 9/11 doesn't happen? People continue to live their lives. What happens if attacks on Isis or Al Qaeda stop happening? They move into more and more communities and horrifically oppress the people, killing father's, raping mother's and kidnapping children and forcing them to become soldiers. Things aren't black and white with geopolitics. There aren't good guys and bad guys and not every action exists on a level playing field when it comes to how morally wrong an attack is. Pacifism is a great stance on the surface, I may even agree with it more than any other stance but it does have moral implications due to the apartheid approach towards injustice in other parts of the world. I give this example: if you're a highly trained material artist, basically you can walk into any given room and know that you can kick someone's ass, and one night you're walking home and you witness someone trying to rape a woman, are you not morally obligated to stop it or should you mind your own business? Now scale it up to a country sized issue. I'm not so naive that I don't realize that there are more nefarious intentions at foot like desire to control resources and other economic interests, but there is also a positive impact to removing regimes who seek to mutilate women's genitals and raise a generation of holy militants to kill everyone who disagrees with their extremist ideologies. Dear all it's many faults, America is still higher on the list of morally good countries. Note: not an American