Skip to content
 
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.

(Twitter)   In this corner, the New Appeasement Times. And in the opposite corner, the Kyiv Independent   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4541 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 25 May 2022 at 3:30 AM (10 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



72 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2022-05-24 9:25:37 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2022-05-25 3:40:27 AM  
Ukraine doesn't want peace, they want to smash every Russian in Ukraine into a chunky paste with the nearest brick until they are righteously victorious over said chunky paste.
 
2022-05-25 3:43:45 AM  
People who enable bullies are worse trash than the bullies themselves.
 
2022-05-25 3:43:53 AM  

LockeOak: Ukraine doesn't want peace, they want to smash every Russian in Ukraine into a chunky paste with the nearest brick until they are righteously victorious over said chunky paste.


That's how you get actual long-term peace.
 
2022-05-25 3:45:14 AM  

LockeOak: Ukraine doesn't want peace, they want to smash every Russian in Ukraine into a chunky paste with the nearest brick until they are righteously victorious over said chunky paste.


Ukraine desperately wants peace, but they're being forced to fight for it. The Russians are the ones who destroyed it, and it won't be restored until they withdraw.
 
2022-05-25 3:47:43 AM  
I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.
 
2022-05-25 4:03:27 AM  
Yeah, the New York "Peace In Our" Times never misses an opportunity to be wrong.

And New York Times Pitchbot never misses being a pitch perfect parody of their disingenuous hot takes.

This one is about Taiwan.

https://twitter.com/DougJBalloon/status/1529092435963437056
 
2022-05-25 4:06:09 AM  

Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.


Here is a response from a few Ukrainians to Noam regarding that.

/Slava Ukraini!
 
2022-05-25 4:14:56 AM  
I hope Ukraine pushes them all the way out and reclaims Crimea... and that Putin lives just long enough to see it happen.
 
2022-05-25 4:15:37 AM  

Conservative Evangelical Millennial Cyclist: Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.

Here is a response from a few Ukrainians to Noam regarding that.

/Slava Ukraini!


One of Chomsky's translators, a Ukrainian  had a few choices words, too. Thanks for the link, it's a great read!
 
2022-05-25 4:22:29 AM  

Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.


As a lefty lefty, I say fark Noam Chomsky, fark fascists and fark those that want to compromise with them. Looking at you, Centrist Dems.
 
2022-05-25 4:23:21 AM  

Klicrai: I hope Ukraine pushes them all the way out and reclaims Crimea... and that Putin lives just long enough to see it happen.


I hope they push the Russians all the way back to wherever Putin is hiding, and shoot him in the head.
 
2022-05-25 4:41:11 AM  
c.tenor.comView Full Size
 
2022-05-25 4:59:40 AM  
How has the New York Times managed to expand its editorial board? Necromancy?

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2022-05-25 5:25:41 AM  

Dr. DJ Duckhunt: Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.

As a lefty lefty, I say fark Noam Chomsky, fark fascists and fark those that want to compromise with them. Looking at you, Centrist Dems.


Maybe the voters should stop giving Republicans a seat at the table by electing large groups of Republican legislators.

Maybe you should stop boosting Republicans by attacking Democrats.
 
2022-05-25 5:29:20 AM  

Conservative Evangelical Millennial Cyclist: Here is a response from a few Ukrainians to Noam regarding that.


A powerful reply indeed, thanks for posting that.
 
2022-05-25 5:47:06 AM  

LockeOak: Ukraine doesn't want peace, they want to smash every Russian in Ukraine into a chunky paste with the nearest brick until they are righteously victorious over said chunky paste.


Peace is more than just the absence of war.
 
2022-05-25 5:54:51 AM  
FTFE: Because here's the thing. Ukrainian society will never agree to any concessions. Those who don't understand this simple fact don't understand Ukraine at all, and perhaps shouldn't share their uneducated speculations in one of the world's leading media publications.

I think that is editorial speak for STFU noobs!
 
2022-05-25 6:02:22 AM  
The rest of the west is awfully eager to give away territory that isn't theirs in a fight they are too chickenshiat to get directly involved in, for the benefit of a villain who will just keep doing this again and again.
 
2022-05-25 6:04:43 AM  
I cancelled my NYT subscription a couple of years ago due to the high quantity and low quality of pieces in their opinion section. I would much rather they stop paying hack columnists to play devil's advocate and fund actual journalism instead.
 
2022-05-25 6:07:02 AM  
Oh no! A foreign war is becoming *prolonged shudder of horror* complicated! Americans aren't ready for that! Heaven forfend!

Wars are complicated. They take time to resolve. They're expensive. Messy, even. But sometimes, violence becomes the only means to ensure survival. When one country is trying to make another country cease to exist, fighting a war is necessary if the victimized country wishes to exist. Your opinions on the matter are wholly irrelevant.

Ukraine is fighting for survival. Period. Full stop. The invaders have publicly stated they plan to eliminate Ukraine as a culture and a nation. Millions of Ukrainians have been driven from their homes by the invaders, and thousands have died- including noncombatants and children. The invaders have engaged in systematic torture and murder of non-combatants, and are launching artillery and missile strikes into civilian residential areas in order to terrorize Ukrainians into giving up.

For a variety of reasons (some of which I disagree with), the US government has not become directly involved in the war. The US government has, however, helped the victim of aggression by providing Ukraine with weapons and equipment and training and intelligence assistance, mostly because it is in the US government's interests for Ukraine to succeed and the invaders to fail. Many countries allied with the US are following similar paths to assist Ukraine, mostly for the same reasons.

Because Ukraine is literally fighting or survival; and because they prepared for the possibility of this conflict with this invader; and because the US and other Western governments are providing logistical, monetary, and intelligence support; and because Ukraine is receiving military equipment to help them in their fight for survival; Ukraine has survived being under constant attack for three months. Ukraine has even begun counter-offensives to drive the invaders out. In the real world, the story doesn't end after the third commercial break, with a brief denouement after the last set of commercials.

The US military is extremely competent, incredibly well-supported by intelligence and logistics, and ridiculously well-equipped. Because of these factors, US combat operations are often brief and have relatively few US casualties. The NYT has apparently become spoiled by the US military habit of applying overwhelming force on the battlefield to make actual combat as brief as possible. This reduces US casualties and puts minimal strain on the US economy. That sort of warfare is relatively new, but the NYT seems to think the rest of the world operates the same way. Never mind what's actually happening on the battlefields, long wars are inconvenient for the NYT's marketing schedule.

The only way to end the war in Ukraine on a timetable the NYT would be happy with would be for US and/or NATO to become directly involved in the combat- or for Ukraine to stop fighting back and meekly accept getting robbed and raped by their obnoxious neighbor every couple of years.

There's the simple binary choice Americans evidently prefer- get directly involved in combat or watch Ukraine get nibbled to death every time their neighbor feels a bit peckish. If neither of these options are acceptable to the NYT, perhaps they should STFU and let Ukrainians make their own decisions. The NYT doesn't get to decide what could be considered an acceptable outcome of the war. The victims of this unprovoked war are the ONLY people who get to make that call. As long as Ukrainians are willing to fight for their survival, the very least we could do is what we're doing right now.
 
2022-05-25 6:14:27 AM  
I will always think of it as Judith Miller's BS paper.
 
2022-05-25 6:42:40 AM  
Russia can have peace whenever it wants.  It's the one who broke peace.  Ukraine is the one without choice.

These enablers always miss that.  How about they surrender their homes for peace?
 
2022-05-25 6:44:51 AM  
The sad thing is the push for appeasement is not for peace, or even gaining land for Russia, or letting him 'save face.' It's about getting the Russian money spigot turned back on for Republican candidates, because the RNC is having to dip into their own pockets to shore up a field of idiots and maladroit yet verbal spastics, and that cuts into their own graft. A whole microcosm of lobbyists and promoters are looking at the accounts locked up by sanctions, and it scares the bejeebus out of them. This isn't about peace, it's not about Ukraine, it's not about anything but cash flowing to candidates that are already committed to a trajectory that they started before this mess, and everyone else thought things would have smoothed over by now, and Ukraine winning their fight, and Russia being sanctioned until next year or beyond is terrifying to those folks looking for quiet and unassuming campaign dollars, and worse, in order to qualify for those dollars, they have to continue the path their on, just in case the spigot gets turned back on sooner as opposed to later.
 
2022-05-25 6:47:23 AM  

Wenchmaster: Oh no! A foreign war is becoming *prolonged shudder of horror* complicated! Americans aren't ready for that! Heaven forfend!

Wars are complicated. They take time to resolve. They're expensive. Messy, even. But sometimes, violence becomes the only means to ensure survival. When one country is trying to make another country cease to exist, fighting a war is necessary if the victimized country wishes to exist. Your opinions on the matter are wholly irrelevant.

Ukraine is fighting for survival. Period. Full stop. The invaders have publicly stated they plan to eliminate Ukraine as a culture and a nation. Millions of Ukrainians have been driven from their homes by the invaders, and thousands have died- including noncombatants and children. The invaders have engaged in systematic torture and murder of non-combatants, and are launching artillery and missile strikes into civilian residential areas in order to terrorize Ukrainians into giving up.

For a variety of reasons (some of which I disagree with), the US government has not become directly involved in the war. The US government has, however, helped the victim of aggression by providing Ukraine with weapons and equipment and training and intelligence assistance, mostly because it is in the US government's interests for Ukraine to succeed and the invaders to fail. Many countries allied with the US are following similar paths to assist Ukraine, mostly for the same reasons.

Because Ukraine is literally fighting or survival; and because they prepared for the possibility of this conflict with this invader; and because the US and other Western governments are providing logistical, monetary, and intelligence support; and because Ukraine is receiving military equipment to help them in their fight for survival; Ukraine has survived being under constant attack for three months. Ukraine has even begun counter-offensives to drive the invaders out. In the real world, the story doesn't end after the third commercial break, with a brief denouement after the last set of commercials.

The US military is extremely competent, incredibly well-supported by intelligence and logistics, and ridiculously well-equipped. Because of these factors, US combat operations are often brief and have relatively few US casualties. The NYT has apparently become spoiled by the US military habit of applying overwhelming force on the battlefield to make actual combat as brief as possible. This reduces US casualties and puts minimal strain on the US economy. That sort of warfare is relatively new, but the NYT seems to think the rest of the world operates the same way. Never mind what's actually happening on the battlefields, long wars are inconvenient for the NYT's marketing schedule.

The only way to end the war in Ukraine on a timetable the NYT would be happy with would be for US and/or NATO to become directly involved in the combat- or for Ukraine to stop fighting back and meekly accept getting robbed and raped by their obnoxious neighbor every couple of years.

There's the simple binary choice Americans evidently prefer- get directly involved in combat or watch Ukraine get nibbled to death every time their neighbor feels a bit peckish. If neither of these options are acceptable to the NYT, perhaps they should STFU and let Ukrainians make their own decisions. The NYT doesn't get to decide what could be considered an acceptable outcome of the war. The victims of this unprovoked war are the ONLY people who get to make that call. As long as Ukrainians are willing to fight for their survival, the very least we could do is what we're doing right now.


media3.giphy.comView Full Size
 
2022-05-25 6:49:10 AM  

Klicrai: I hope Ukraine pushes them all the way out and reclaims Crimea... and that Putin lives just long enough to see it happen.


I hope the last words Putin hears, just before he dies in pain and terror, are "Slava Ukraini."
 
2022-05-25 7:02:38 AM  
Destroy the Russian Army
Bankrupt Russia for rebuilding costs at a rate consistent with foreign contractors skimming 20% off the top.
 
2022-05-25 7:03:59 AM  

Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.


Chomsky and Kissinger have both been arguing Ukraine should give in to Russia since Crimea was being stolen several years ago.  Norm is about as useful these days as his namesake at the end of the bar.
 
2022-05-25 7:05:44 AM  

UNC_Samurai: Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.

Chomsky and Kissinger have both been arguing Ukraine should give in to Russia since Crimea was being stolen several years ago.  Norm is about as useful these days as his namesake at the end of the bar.


Noam the guy who sat next to Cluff?
 
2022-05-25 7:08:44 AM  

Hagbard_C: How has the New York Times managed to expand its editorial board? Necromancy?

[Fark user image image 259x194]


Chamberlain was in a no-win situation.  Blame Deladier for being unwilling to go to war with Germany because he was scared of a repeat of the Western Front.  Without French boots and soil, how exactly was Britain supposed to support a land-locked country on Germany's southern border?
 
2022-05-25 7:11:59 AM  
I am sort of hoping the war ends with land concessions though. Forcing Russia to give back Crimea would be a just outcome indeed.
 
2022-05-25 7:14:00 AM  

hubiestubert: The sad thing is the push for appeasement is not for peace, or even gaining land for Russia, or letting him 'save face.' It's about getting the Russian money spigot turned back on for Republican candidates, because the RNC is having to dip into their own pockets to shore up a field of idiots and maladroit yet verbal spastics, and that cuts into their own graft. A whole microcosm of lobbyists and promoters are looking at the accounts locked up by sanctions, and it scares the bejeebus out of them. This isn't about peace, it's not about Ukraine, it's not about anything but cash flowing to candidates that are already committed to a trajectory that they started before this mess, and everyone else thought things would have smoothed over by now, and Ukraine winning their fight, and Russia being sanctioned until next year or beyond is terrifying to those folks looking for quiet and unassuming campaign dollars, and worse, in order to qualify for those dollars, they have to continue the path their on, just in case the spigot gets turned back on sooner as opposed to later.


Fark republicans.  Let them eat yachts.
 
2022-05-25 7:14:19 AM  

IndyJohn: UNC_Samurai: Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.

Chomsky and Kissinger have both been arguing Ukraine should give in to Russia since Crimea was being stolen several years ago.  Norm is about as useful these days as his namesake at the end of the bar.

Noam the guy who sat next to Cluff?


Its early and I haven't had coffee
 
2022-05-25 7:16:36 AM  

UNC_Samurai: Discordulator: I spent longer than I would like to admit talking to someone who was insisting a "negotiated settlement" wasn't surrender, even if things were being surrendered as a term of the settlement.

It was all because he was defending Noam Chomsky, who thinks that Ukraine losing to Russia is inevitable, and should negotiate for peace instead of fighting back, and that the states shouldn't arm Ukraine in order to pressure them to look for a diplomatic solution.

For a socialist, I have noticed Chomsky sure likes to defend fascist regimes, so long as they are opposed to the states.

The New York Times seems to be echoing Chomsky.

fark that, Slava Ukraini.

Chomsky and Kissinger have both been arguing Ukraine should give in to Russia since Crimea was being stolen several years ago.  Norm is about as useful these days as his namesake at the end of the bar.


Speaking of necromancy...I thought fake-ass accent Henry died years ago.  Maybe it was just wishful thinking.
 
2022-05-25 7:21:16 AM  

LockeOak: Ukraine doesn't want peace, they want to smash every Russian in Ukraine into a chunky paste with the nearest brick until they are righteously victorious over said chunky paste.


They just want the Russians to go home. If they go home the war is over that day.
 
2022-05-25 7:35:20 AM  
The New York Times is just being consistent.
 
2022-05-25 7:41:03 AM  
This timeline really sucks. Old man Chomsky should go quietly into that goodnight.
 
2022-05-25 7:44:40 AM  
TL;DR: "New York Times; go f*** yourselves."
 
2022-05-25 7:47:48 AM  

hubiestubert: The sad thing is the push for appeasement is not for peace, or even gaining land for Russia, or letting him 'save face.' It's about getting the Russian money spigot turned back on for Republican candidates,


I'd guess it's not just the GOPniks who miss the flow of rubles

Businesses would like to resume operations in a post-war Russia. Germany and France would love to resume using Russian hydrocarbons.

There are probably some folks whose livelihoods are dependent upon Russian oligarchs buying real estate, high end luxury goods, and so forth in NYC who might lean on their friends at the NYT to do what they can to return to 'normalcy.

Ehhhh, maybe I'm too cynical, and the NYT editorial board honestly believes the people of Ukraine are best served by a negotiated settlement of hostilities

Estonian PM Kaja Kallas has some thoughts about Russian negotiating tactics

yourMSC Studio #MSC2022: Talk with Kaja Kallas & Ana Kasparian
Youtube Gvyr_5lVj8E
 
2022-05-25 7:57:51 AM  

Parthenogenetic: There are probably some folks whose livelihoods are dependent upon Russian oligarchs buying real estate, high end luxury goods, and so forth in NYC who might lean on their friends at the NYT to do what they can to return to 'normalcy.

Ehhhh, maybe I'm too cynical, and the NYT editorial board honestly believes the people of Ukraine are best served by a negotiated settlement of hostilities


I think a lot of it comes down to people at NYT just being up their own assholes.  They spend all their time among the chattering classes, and the only way they know how to get in touch with "common people" is to visit a diner in the hinterlands.
 
2022-05-25 8:15:47 AM  

Mr.Insightful: Yeah, the New York "Peace In Our" Times never misses an opportunity to be wrong.

And New York Times Pitchbot never misses being a pitch perfect parody of their disingenuous hot takes.

This one is about Taiwan.

https://twitter.com/DougJBalloon/status/1529092435963437056


Hey, the NYT was all in for invading Iraq on false pretences. Give them a little credit.
 
2022-05-25 8:22:07 AM  

UNC_Samurai: Hagbard_C: How has the New York Times managed to expand its editorial board? Necromancy?

[Fark user image image 259x194]

Chamberlain was in a no-win situation.  Blame Deladier for being unwilling to go to war with Germany because he was scared of a repeat of the Western Front.  Without French boots and soil, how exactly was Britain supposed to support a land-locked country on Germany's southern border?


The myth of Chamberlain is precious propaganda to every asshole who wants to goad a society into doing something stupid.
 
2022-05-25 8:35:48 AM  
See also this open letter by a bunch of Ukrainian analysts.
https://kse.ua/about-the-school/news/open-letter-to-the-editorial-in-nyt-the-war-in-ukraine-is-getting-complicated-and-america-isn-t-ready-may-19-2022-by-group-of-ukrainian-analysts-and-academic-economists/

Oh they mad.
 
2022-05-25 8:37:40 AM  
I've been really impressed with the Kyiv Independent.  Go hit their website and dig into the archives.  It's what a newspaper is supposed to do.  And even more impressive for the fact that they are working and publishing 100% in English.

I watched a video yesterday of Ilia Ponamarenko, their chief defense reporter, and another guy sampling Russian and Ukrainian MREs.  The guy speaks better English than 50% of the US.
 
2022-05-25 8:48:27 AM  
fark the russians, man. If I had the power of Sauron, I'd burn them all to the ground.
 
Juc [recently expired TotalFark]
2022-05-25 9:08:00 AM  
I too would like the war to end sooner rather than later, that's why we should stop pussy footing about and give Ukraine jets, helicopters, and everything else.

Russia has already telegraphed its intentions. Surrendering territory will not end this. Hell, ukraine completely losing will not end this. What will end this is Russia being defeated and the leadership giving up on the idea of invading is most of its neighbours to commit genocide and turn the places Russian.

I get not liking the idea that the only real option is fighting, but sometimes you got to to protect what's important and this is very much an existential fight for Ukraine, and its not yet invaded neighbours
 
2022-05-25 9:12:53 AM  
A lot of connected people positioned themselves with the assumption that Russia was going to take Ukraine in a few days and now they're holding a hot bag of shiat.
 
2022-05-25 9:13:04 AM  
September 1938
pbs.twimg.comView Full Size


September 1939
pbs.twimg.comView Full Size


Those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
 
2022-05-25 9:23:49 AM  

gaslight: The New York Times is just being consistent.


Came here to mention Duranty and Holodomor denial. The NYT decided the Holocaust was to be buried in the back pages and not to be spoken of.
 
2022-05-25 9:35:32 AM  
How long until this?

"America needs leaders familiar with the intricacies of business and politics in Russia and Ukraine. Perhaps none are more experienced in this milieu than Paul Manafort. Could his advice lead to peace in Europe, and a path to his own redemption?"
 
Displayed 50 of 72 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.