That doesn&#x27;t sound very left to me. It sounds like cheering brutality for the sake of brutality unless she is specifically interested in the relative prestige among the most powerful nations on the planet.<p>Reactions to the attacks, often based on terrible strategy, have killed far more innocent people outside of the US than were killed in the attacks. It would make no sense to argue that previous foreign policy was harmful to other poorer countries in such a way that the attacks were justified, without acknowledging that the attacks made people&#x27;s lives worse around the world.<p>&quot;Had it coming&quot; is a phrase I&#x27;d expect more from a right winger who feels his or her superiority is insufficiently respected.  Such a right wing person would still be angry with the US for Roosevelt telling Churchill that he didn&#x27;t get to keep his empire, and argue about the terrorist attacks in terms of disorder and power vacuums and other imperial concepts. (It should go without saying that colonialism causes far more harm than terrorism)<p>I&#x27;m joking to say that she is a closet believer in colonialism, and I think she was making a joke too, but I think the humor is aimed for a domestic audience&#x27;s national pride. Taking glee in others misfortune because they &quot;deserve it&quot;, when the result will be counter productive to anything good happening is not good.