If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fark)   Press conference to discuss State of War resolution to be held at 1:30pm. Source: Rep. Barr's office   (barrrelease.homestead.com) divider line 275
    More: PSA  
•       •       •

3694 clicks; posted to Main » on 13 Sep 2001 at 11:36 AM (12 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



275 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2001-09-13 11:37:42 AM
whoa.
 
2001-09-13 11:37:48 AM
It's time.
 
2001-09-13 11:38:13 AM
they woke a sleeping giant this time
 
2001-09-13 11:38:16 AM
Hot damn, we're goin to war... hope theres no draft.
 
2001-09-13 11:38:51 AM
need more info.
 
2001-09-13 11:39:08 AM
Against Who???
 
2001-09-13 11:39:17 AM
May we ask, against whom ?
 
2001-09-13 11:40:40 AM
there shouldnt be a draft, they probably are just going to launch a few cruise missiles from the sea until they say uncle. How long could it take? I say it will be shorter than the gulf war
 
2001-09-13 11:41:39 AM
<heavy sarcasm>

Of course... because it has worked so well at preventing terrorism in the past.

</heavy sarcasm>
 
2001-09-13 11:41:51 AM
yes, this will be WW2.02, the A-specific war.
 
2001-09-13 11:42:23 AM
Yeah, throw me into the war against "who" camp as well. If they declare war against all terrorism, get ready for a long bloody ride. And one that uses a type of warfare that we've never even considered before.

3Horn
Not that I really have a problem with that.
 
2001-09-13 11:42:26 AM
War... as in WAR? Yike.
 
2001-09-13 11:42:39 AM
It's against whoever did this. I don't think they're naming anyone specific yet
 
2001-09-13 11:43:23 AM
to have a war you need an opponent, any word on who the (un)lucky terrorist nation is?
 
2001-09-13 11:43:30 AM
DREW, did clearchannel decide to let you in on things because they use fark for their news stories.
 
2001-09-13 11:44:05 AM
Welcome to the world of Bio-Chemical warfare. :(
 
2001-09-13 11:44:34 AM
A war against noone specific. That sounds complicated.
 
2001-09-13 11:44:40 AM
that or nuclear holocaust
 
2001-09-13 11:44:45 AM
Yep, I'm an 'against who' questioner too.
 
2001-09-13 11:44:47 AM
How much more effective is "war on terrorism" going to be than "war on drugs"? Not much, I tell you.
Iraq's the only country that hasn't condemned the attacks, so if they want to declare war on a country, it's gotta be Iraq. Not much change there then.
 
Mex
2001-09-13 11:45:39 AM
(KINDA OFF TOPIC) QUESTION:
Does anyone know where to get that image of uncle sam getting ready to fight that is behind the fark logo? It's pretty good, I'd like to use it.

Thanks.
 
2001-09-13 11:45:55 AM
i have a neat idea to make some money for the victims...25.00 and they will paint a little personal msg on a bomb. 50.00 and get your msg on a cruise missle!
 
2001-09-13 11:46:21 AM
Hoopy: yes that's exactly right
 
2001-09-13 11:46:37 AM
 
Mex
2001-09-13 11:46:40 AM
uh oh...

It's the THIRD WORLD WAR!!!
 
2001-09-13 11:46:42 AM
What is the source of the feed info? What was the exact wording?
 
MJC
2001-09-13 11:47:35 AM
I can't find anything on this from the main news sites. What/who is the 'source' of this rumor????
 
2001-09-13 11:48:19 AM
thats good Drew...ive been useing FARK so much i cant remember how to surf the net anymore...can someone post the link to the interview with drew i couldnt find it on the radio stations page
 
2001-09-13 11:48:57 AM
There's an interesting analysis of the response options here:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/americas/newsid_1541000/1541786.stm
 
2001-09-13 11:49:13 AM
for good up to date news try
www.npr.org
 
2001-09-13 11:49:41 AM
They'll probably declare war on bin Laden. (Yes you can declare war on just one person)

I don't know, it's awfully soon if you ask me and it doesn't seem it would be this soon, but then again, congress is pretty persistant on how much they dislike this terrible tragedy and wish to start a retaliation as soon as possible. Either way, this is definately interesting.
 
2001-09-13 11:50:00 AM
If you are going to declare war on terrorism, you can't just lob some missiles at them. It doesn't work well, we tried that in Kosovo and it turned out we didn't do near the damage we thought we had. And that was a country's army, which may not be what we're dealing with here.
To effectively defeat an enemy, you need ground troops.

Also, what exactly are the legal ramifications of declaring war? I'm sure an actual declaration of war is a bigger deal then say declaring war on drugs or poverty.
Anyone know?
 
2001-09-13 11:50:13 AM
Hoopy-Interview with Drew is on main page - Wednesday
 
2001-09-13 11:50:51 AM
BBC has a ticker saying "Bush Says 'We will win war on terrorism.' More soon" Might be worth keeping an eye on.
I'm off home now, good luck to us all, huh?
 
2001-09-13 11:50:52 AM
I can't get to NATO's website. THis is strange.

My message for the bomb "all your Qa'ida are belong to us"
 
2001-09-13 11:51:02 AM
Fb... re the pic you requested in an earlier post... I have it (three firemen hositing the flag) didn't know how to post it here, so I emailed it to you.
 
2001-09-13 11:51:08 AM
Side note: Speaking of war, how we doing on that "War On Drugs" thingy we launched a few years ago? What's the score?
 
2001-09-13 11:51:09 AM
Holy shiat...
 
2001-09-13 11:51:17 AM
I am hearing that the House and Senate are drafting a resolution authorizing the use of force in retaliation. I have not heard anything about a declaration of war...not that they have to tell me or anything.

Just to be clear for everyone, war does not have to be declared against a country. The US declared war in the 1800s against the Barbary Pirates (sp?, and not the Butte Pirates :) ). The declaration could be against the specific terrorist organization(s) involved. I do not believe they can, however, declare war against terrorism in general. I guess they could, but I think that would draw more critisism than anything and would be seen as the politaclly motivated, waste of paper that it was (kinda like the resolution they passed yesterday).
 
2001-09-13 11:51:46 AM
sinking heart...
 
2001-09-13 11:52:30 AM
JodiBug, please send that to me too... Thanks
 
2001-09-13 11:52:54 AM
if we go to war, with evidence, NATO goes to war too. who does china side with? india? russia? ack!
the whole "decentralized structure" of the terrrorist network (they *have* to be decentralized...what, are you going to have a big neon "Terrorist HQ" sign over your door? they don't want bruce willis to find them that easy) makes for a scary possibility...fighting every crappy third world nation at once. the loss of innocent lives would be staggering...adding to an already staggering total.
i think someone already said, yikes!
k
 
2001-09-13 11:52:55 AM
Its not gonna be a World War per se, since most of the world, Europe, China, Russia, Australia etc is on the side of the US. I thought a World War implied more than a land mass one sided war.
 
2001-09-13 11:53:34 AM
US War on Drugs Scoreboard

US - 3
Drug Cartels - 752
 
2001-09-13 11:53:34 AM
Mungo and others:
This the 'War' article on ananova. Make up your own mind.

Bush vows US will 'lead the world to victory'

President Bush says he will lead the world to victory in the fight against terrorism.

The Republican had tears in his eyes as he came to the end of a press conference at The Oval office.

He said he had received the support of other world leaders and said they understood the act of war could have been declared upon them.

He described it as the first war of the 21st century and said he believed there would be universal approval of the action the US government takes.

"We will not discuss intelligence matters or how we gather intelligence matters nor what we know about anybody."

He added: "Now is an opportunity, by coming together, of whipping terrorism, hunting it down, finding it and holding them accountable.

"They must understand this is now the focus of my administration. War has been declared upon us and we will lead the world to victory."

Story filed: 16:51 Thursday
 
2001-09-13 11:53:34 AM
Bigpeeler The drugs won. lol
 
2001-09-13 11:53:38 AM
Thomas Jefferson declared war on the Barbary Pirates in 1803.
 
2001-09-13 11:54:24 AM
Actually there's nothing in the constitution that restricts who Congress can and can't declare war against. The 3rd president declared war on "pirates", the terrorists of that time.
 
2001-09-13 11:54:26 AM
I think a statement like that is a bit heavy to dump into the queue without a link. Any official links yet?
 
2001-09-13 11:54:31 AM
3horn: declaring war on terrorism would not only be bloody, but symbolic, and useless.

All: My thinking is that the intell community knows more about "the who" than what is out in the press. I may be wrong, but they often know a whole lot more shiat than they're allowed to tell.
 
Displayed 50 of 275 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »





Report