World Trade Center Building 7
Building 7 of the World Trade Center was not one of the initial targets for al Qaeda but suffered significant damage leading to the collapse of the building. The building had been completely evacuated at the time the building collapsed at 5:21 p.m. the same day the World Trade Centers were attacked. The buildings structure was altered due to fires that were ignited from impact of debris when the North Tower collapsed. The water in the fire system was shut-off due to a city main break making it unavailable to fight the fires. The thermal expansion caused joints of the building to expand eventually causing column 79 to buckle and collapse the 13th floor. This caused a cascade of the falling floors and caused the core of the building to fail within seconds initiating the complete fall of the building. After this incident, it was made known that a fire can be the primary cause of the collapse of a tall, steel structured building. (Reid, 2008)
Analysts and researchers immediately began predicting what impact these attacks would have on the economy, both short-term and long-term. In one report it explains that the attacks would produce long-term effects to airlines, hotels, travel agencies, upscale restaurants, entertainment, and the suppliers that support those industries. The attacks did have this negative impact on society and caused citizens and suppliers to spend less money for fear of another depression and unknown thoughts of what might happen with the announcement of War On Terrorism. Long-term predictions consisted of a very costly process to reshape the economy’s safety and security infrastructure. There would also be very high post-attack costs. The assumptions that were made after the attacks did in fact turn out to be mostly correct. The terrorists were successful at having a great impact on the economic wellness of the United States, although, it brought the country closer together and become more united. (Ford, 2001)
A study of how citizens responded politically after the 9/11 attacks and terrorist attacks altogether, was conducted by Leonie Huddy and Stanley Feldman. They found that individuals based their opinion and support about the attacks on the way they were feeling during that time. Common feelings were anger and anxiety during the attacks. For example, if an individual perceived the possibility of a future terrorist threat, they would be more likely to support President George W. Bush and stronger national security policies because of the anger they felt. Therefore, those that felt insecure and saw the nation as being more susceptible to potential terrorism, were most likely to demand the U.S. government respond more powerfully and aggressively to the attacks. They also discovered that Americans who were highly patriotic were more likely to be angry and support foreign policy and war. The angry would be in support of heavier security policies and the War On Terrorism...