More on the WTC Disaster (Updated) [Sep 11, 2001, 9:30 pm ET] – Share – Viewing Comments
Of course this is not game related (we do not expect to be doing any further
game coverage today), but with the legit news sites being almost impossible to
access at times today, we've been getting loads of requests for more information
about what's been going on. Here is the latest as of about 9:00 PM EDT:
- President Bush addressed the nation 8:30 PM EDT. Here's a wire report: WASHINGTON (AP) - A grim-faced President Bush condemned ghastly attacks in Washington and New York on Tuesday and vowed to "find those responsible and bring them to justice." In the second Oval Office address of his presidency, Bush said the United States would retaliate against ``those behind these evil acts,'' and any country that harbors them.
To recap:
- In two separate attacks, hijacked planes struck both main towers of the World Trade Center in Manhattan this morning, and both of the "twin towers" subsequently collapsed.
- A hijacked plane struck the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. and part of it has collapsed as well.
- A hijacked plane crashed in western Pennsylvania, near Pittsburgh. Reports indicate the hijackers planned to crash this plane into Camp David in Maryland.
- 47 Story WTC building seven, one of the five (relatively) smaller buildings in the World Trade Center also later collapsed from ancillary damage.
- The White House, the Pentagon, and the Capitol Building were all evacuated, all domestic flights in the US have been grounded through at least noon tomorrow.
- Other closings include most federal offices, the stock markets, the Disney theme parks, and the cancellation of today's Major League Baseball schedule. The President's speech announced that all federal agencies will be open for business tomorrow.
- Broadcasts out of Afghanistan showed evidence of missile attacks and antiaircraft fire, but what connection this has to today's apparent terrorist attacks in the US is not clear at this point. The US has denied involvement in these attacks.
- In the first hints of any sort at the scope of casualties, the New York City Fire Department has estimated that as many as half of the 400 firefighters dispatched to the scene are missing. CNN has said that 78 Police officers are missing. Also, the death toll from those on the four hijacked planes has been placed at 266. The number of dead and injured at the Pentagon has been widely reported as about 100. No estimates of the number of victims from the World Trade Center have been made.
- People throughout the United States have are being urged to donate blood to help offset significant shortages in New York and Washington. The American Red Cross in Greater New York or the American Red Cross are places to contact about donating blood or money, or both.
- Some news sites seem to be back online. Here are some links that have been more reliable: CNN.com; CNET.com; Yahoo; The New York Times; washingtonpost.com; usnews.com; ABCNEWS.com; FOXNews.com; MSNBC; and BBC News Online.
All of our thoughts go out to the victims of these attacks and their families and friends in what must be an incredibly difficult time.
I'll try and defend my statements as best I can, but you did have some rather good points mister 206.83....
Bravery is, in my opinion, doing what you feel is right despite the terrible cost to you. This is what these terrorists did and although I don't condone their actions or their way of dealing with problems (force) I do believe this was not a cowardly act. A cowardly act would be launching a biolical weapon, realeasing arsenic or somet such chemical into Manhattan would not, in my opinion, be bravery. These terrorists did what they felt needed to be done, despite the fact that they would pay the ultimate price for doing it. And BTW, I bet the people that were carrying out these attacks felt they would save lives either directly or indirectory in the near or far future (we will not know until their motives become more clear, if they become more clear in fact.) This fits your definition of bravery rather well.
I am not condemning the men and women who make up the US armed forces, I am condemning those who order these attacks, which I do not believe are constitutional (no police actions are.) I have the deepest respect for those who put their lives on the line every day to complete the orders that were ordered by the people appointed by the people whom we the people elected (perhaps that long a chain of command is part of the problems, as well.) The point I was trying to make (I did a rather poor job of this as I'd been writing for quite some time and my thoughts were becoming scrambled, my appoligies) was that what America does each day is no less cowardly than this attack on the WTC and Pentagon. I think you may understand me a little better now :-/ .
I never said that I could do a better job, I simply stated that those who are alledgedly professionals when it comes to matters like this (president included) have not finished their job and brought peace to the middle east. I know I couldn't do it but that doesn't mean those who are trained for these kind of situations can't or shouldn't be able to. Senators, representatives, and ambassadors from both parties have promised that they would stabalize the situation in the middle east, yesterday's events proved that they had not. Do I not have a right to be angry with those who had claimed they would protect us and then failed? I did not say that it was easy to stabalize that area, I simply said that we were once very close and are now obviously farther than ever (at least on a social level, the leaders of the middle eastern countries are being quite apologetic thus suggesting that those in formal positions of power are no longer out to get us.) I hope that clarified how I feel :-/ .
If you do not like something, but you continue to do it, and you continue to see that it happens, what does this make you? The military knows about collateral damage, and they expect it each time they attack, yet they continue to attack. Alternate methods are not even considered, despite the fact that they exist (although, they do take more effort.) Yes, Iraq does place its military targets in locations that do not make bombing easy, but can we expect him to just leave them out in the open? I believe that the US would do the same thing if those in power did not have to worry about relection ever 2, 4, 6 years, thank god for democracy.
Well, this is all I can say for now (have to run
) I'll be back later, and try and explain my views/actions more, hope you do the same 206.83 (lack of log-in understood, of course.) My apoligies for not addressing everything
Bravery is, in my opinion, doing what you feel is right despite the terrible cost to you. This is what these terrorists did and although I don't condone their actions or their way of dealing with problems (force) I do believe this was not a cowardly act. A cowardly act would be launching a biolical weapon, realeasing arsenic or somet such chemical into Manhattan would not, in my opinion, be bravery. These terrorists did what they felt needed to be done, despite the fact that they would pay the ultimate price for doing it. And BTW, I bet the people that were carrying out these attacks felt they would save lives either directly or indirectory in the near or far future (we will not know until their motives become more clear, if they become more clear in fact.) This fits your definition of bravery rather well.
Wow, never served in the military, have we? Never been subject to being ordered into harm's way? Never trained years to perform well once there? Perhaps you have done all this...and you still wouldn't have the right to uniformly condemn men and women who do the duty you so casually dimiss with contempt. You do realize that some of them don't come back, right? Putting yourself in that situation, especially when you have family you want to go back to, is not cowardly. I wish you would consider your positions on the US side of this issue with more than the stupid (sorry, it really fits) callousness you display here.
I am not condemning the men and women who make up the US armed forces, I am condemning those who order these attacks, which I do not believe are constitutional (no police actions are.) I have the deepest respect for those who put their lives on the line every day to complete the orders that were ordered by the people appointed by the people whom we the people elected (perhaps that long a chain of command is part of the problems, as well.) The point I was trying to make (I did a rather poor job of this as I'd been writing for quite some time and my thoughts were becoming scrambled, my appoligies) was that what America does each day is no less cowardly than this attack on the WTC and Pentagon. I think you may understand me a little better now :-/ .
Oh really...when was the last time YOU tried to avoid a situation like this? A former ambassador, are we? On the Counter-Terrorist Task Force, are we, or should we just ignore the many attempts that have gone before this on your say so, "just because"? Or are you talking out your ass about an issue you don't really know about? Hey, you're probably responding to some people who did the same thing, but it doesn't excuse you, now, does it? Perhaps it isn't so easy to solve the world's problems as you think.
I never said that I could do a better job, I simply stated that those who are alledgedly professionals when it comes to matters like this (president included) have not finished their job and brought peace to the middle east. I know I couldn't do it but that doesn't mean those who are trained for these kind of situations can't or shouldn't be able to. Senators, representatives, and ambassadors from both parties have promised that they would stabalize the situation in the middle east, yesterday's events proved that they had not. Do I not have a right to be angry with those who had claimed they would protect us and then failed? I did not say that it was easy to stabalize that area, I simply said that we were once very close and are now obviously farther than ever (at least on a social level, the leaders of the middle eastern countries are being quite apologetic thus suggesting that those in formal positions of power are no longer out to get us.) I hope that clarified how I feel :-/ .
Yep, collateral damage is pretty horrible...yet, I'm sure our cowardly serviceman just love it when it happens. I'm sure they're glad they get the excuse to INTEND to kill civilians, just like terrorists. I think you are a bit confused in that cowardly label you throw around...or do you really mean that NOT intending to kill civilians is more cowardly? You know what is pretty horrible, too? Putting civilians in military targets, and putting military targets INTENTIONALLY near to schools and hospitals. Hmm...strange how in the U.S., the government tries to DEFEND it's people, not USE their lives in such a fashion in hopes of political leverage.
If you do not like something, but you continue to do it, and you continue to see that it happens, what does this make you? The military knows about collateral damage, and they expect it each time they attack, yet they continue to attack. Alternate methods are not even considered, despite the fact that they exist (although, they do take more effort.) Yes, Iraq does place its military targets in locations that do not make bombing easy, but can we expect him to just leave them out in the open? I believe that the US would do the same thing if those in power did not have to worry about relection ever 2, 4, 6 years, thank god for democracy.
Well, this is all I can say for now (have to run
) I'll be back later, and try and explain my views/actions more, hope you do the same 206.83 (lack of log-in understood, of course.) My apoligies for not addressing everything
I eat pasta!
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2023 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2023 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 6 June 2023, 05:26.