How do we teach our children about 9/11?

Good point on "both sides of the fence," but only if we're being careful to present legitimate arguments. Obviously, religious bigotry has no place in a discussion of the war on terror, but we can't be blind to religiously-motivated defense of terror.

The Secretary of Homeland Security was recently booed repeatedly by making what I thought was the well-founded statement that ISIS isn't Islam, and Islam isn't ISIS (my way of summing his message up) at the Islamic Society of North America. That's an ominous development; it shows that there are extremists in Islam who embrace terror.

I grew up Roman Catholic. I had no problem rejecting terrorism in Northern Ireland from both sides of the conflict, and was even more strongly opposed to the IRA after learning that the Soviets and Libyans were arming and training them. But my religion never led me to endorse the IRA or its acts.

But we do have to be careful never to endorse or repeat errors such as the Sykes-Picot Agreement, arbitrarily drawing national boundaries in other people's land, and laying the foundation for more bloody conflicts. We can avoid that while acting in our national interest to destroy terror.

It started in beruit in 83 and we did nothing

And there are many more events that were not followed up on, (the ship bombing in the Persian Gulf, bombings in Africa, etc) many missed opportunities to stop this, show a STRONG and UNITED front that would have given Islamic Terrorists a reason NOT to try to push at the sleeping giant.

All but two provinces in Iraq rose up against Saddam Hussein during Operation Desert Storm in 1991. We had the opportunity at that time to end the Iraqi Army as a force in being and deprive Saddam Hussein of his power over Iraq. Of course, that's a simplistic presentation of that situation, but many people wee saying at the time we'd have do the job over again.

Saddam Hussein himself could have prevented the 2003 war, merely by being candid about his WMD (many tons of nerve gas precursors remain unaccounted-for in Iraq, and the inexplicable cover-up of massive stores of nerve gas and mustard gas shells only recently became news). I lost a son in that war, and I still wonder why.

Part of teaching the causes of the 9/11 attacks has to be the consequences of our handling of Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. It's one point on which I agreed with Obama before he was elected, and was vividly disappointed in him afterward - he talked a good game of being tough with men who were playing us for fools in Pakistan, then flew over there and handed them even more of our money. Pakistan was a base of operations for Osama bin Laden, and when we found him, it was in Abottabad, not out in the tribal lands, but well within Pakistan's own ability to find him and deliver him to us.

Saudi Arabia, on the other hand, panders to the Wah'habi imams whose fatwas legitimize ISIS, to the extent of blessing the rape of civilians and enemy POWs. We still buy their oil, and sell them advanced weapons systems. Why?

Is there a place where these stories have been collected?

I have been told that the schools are trying to STOP teaching history, because "no one wants to know about what a bunch of dead white dudes did". If we do not learn from the mistakes of history, we are going to be doomed to repeat them in the future!!

A1C Lisa Casserly - that is their big mistake. There's more to history then a bunch of dead white dudes.

SGT David A. 'Cowboy' Groth - I agree whole heartedly. And not just teach the positive things, but drag out the dirt, like slavery, the Nazis, and all that sort of stuff, and shine the bright lights on it. Let the kids know that this stuff happened, and it should NEVER happen again because it was wrong.

I appreciate your recommendation of the need to respond carefully and strategically as well as think through the complexities that exist in the world before we respond militarily. Reaction based on rear, anger and ego are the most likely to cause unexpected consequences. The reaction to 911 was both understandable and necessary. In retrospect what can we learn from it? Was the Afghani government a direct threat? Did their tolerance, if not support justify our attack on their government? Could we have had a more surgical intervention to focus primarily on al Quaeda? Answers to these questions can inform future actions.

We know that hindsight is easier than responding in the present. However, every conflict we have whether personal or international must be a learning experience.

A direct attack on America requires a military response. The question of how we respond is another question. Short and long term consequences need to be considered. Every action requires analysis and consideration so that the next decision is based upon greater wisdom than the last.

Therefore, I think we should make our explanations to the young simple and clear without introducing generalizations related to groups but rather necessary responses related to actions and known perpetrators. Politics always muddies the waters but it is the medium through which we monitor and manage our countries interests and foreign policy for better or worse. Learning from the past without prejudice is the best way to respond in the future. And it is the best way to share the past with the young.

Good point. I love bacon cheeseburgers!! And, I will choose to order that off any menu, even with vegan choices. However, I'd have to give up my beloved bacon cheeseburgers if I had to kill my own meat. I love piggies, and love cows, too. I could never kill or eat something that I had fed. I remember that my mother - a farm raised girl - told me once that her senior class trip (supposed to be a fun reward for making it to Graduation) was to the St. Paul (Minnesota) STOCK YARDS, where they watched animals slaughtered. She said it was completely and utterly horrifying. You are right to say that the down and dirty details should not be explained to small children, but as they grew older, withholding information is wrong.