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 honestly would have to say that to apply the label of terrorists using today's context to the IRA would not be fair. Seriously give this consideration for a moment. For sake of argument lets exclude the Real IRA, RHD, UVF, etc.
A terrorist is usually associated with committing criminal acts of a generally violent nature against civilians. We would think of hijackings, taking hostages, blowing up buildings, and the like. Now, if you look at the history of the IRA, we would see that they primarily target British and Loyalist military personnel and installations. Granted there have been cases where civilian buildings were targeted, but almost all if not all of which were targeted at a time where the population of that building was virtually nill. This does not show the intent to actually do harm to civilans directly.
Would you say this behavior is more akin to military strategies, as opposed to fanatical criminals out to do nothing but kill people? Just using terms from recent events, the words "IRA demilitarization" or "IRA ceasefire" would be more appropriately applied to military forces, not rogue terrorists.
I think the whole situation is very much like when the British had to get the Romans out, or the US war for independence.
Now finally, to disregard terrorists acts committed by almost all military forces around the world including American and British is unfair. It really is an unfortunate tactic that is used, but we don't consider American or British soldiers terrorists do we (although had the word been around during the 1700s, the British would have applied the terrorist label to Americans)?
I hope the parallels I've drawn there between terrorism and war make some sense (hey, its early in the morning here
) As I said, I would never support acts of violence against Irish or British common citizens.
I feel for the British people and what they've gone through with the turmoil in Ireland. Interestingly enough, a recent poll showed a majority of Britons supported pulling out any British interests in Ireland. I can certainly dig that information up if you'd like to see it.
Thanks for your lively and mature debate
A terrorist is usually associated with committing criminal acts of a generally violent nature against civilians. We would think of hijackings, taking hostages, blowing up buildings, and the like. Now, if you look at the history of the IRA, we would see that they primarily target British and Loyalist military personnel and installations. Granted there have been cases where civilian buildings were targeted, but almost all if not all of which were targeted at a time where the population of that building was virtually nill. This does not show the intent to actually do harm to civilans directly.
Would you say this behavior is more akin to military strategies, as opposed to fanatical criminals out to do nothing but kill people? Just using terms from recent events, the words "IRA demilitarization" or "IRA ceasefire" would be more appropriately applied to military forces, not rogue terrorists.
I think the whole situation is very much like when the British had to get the Romans out, or the US war for independence.
Now finally, to disregard terrorists acts committed by almost all military forces around the world including American and British is unfair. It really is an unfortunate tactic that is used, but we don't consider American or British soldiers terrorists do we (although had the word been around during the 1700s, the British would have applied the terrorist label to Americans)?
I hope the parallels I've drawn there between terrorism and war make some sense (hey, its early in the morning here
) As I said, I would never support acts of violence against Irish or British common citizens.I feel for the British people and what they've gone through with the turmoil in Ireland. Interestingly enough, a recent poll showed a majority of Britons supported pulling out any British interests in Ireland. I can certainly dig that information up if you'd like to see it.
Thanks for your lively and mature debate
====================
You wouldn't care what people thought of you if you realized how seldom they do
You wouldn't care what people thought of you if you realized how seldom they do
Date
Subject
Author
Copyright © 1996-2020 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Privacy Policy. Manage Cookie Settings.
News CGI copyright © 1999-2020 James "furn" Furness & Blue's News. All rights reserved.
Chatbear v1.5.0/blue++: Page generated 21 September 2020, 11:53.