United 93

Error message

Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/pied-piper.ermarian.net/includes/common.inc).

Pages

AuthorTopic: United 93
Warrior
Member # 7002
Profile #25
quote:
Originally written by Khoth:

I've come across some nutters on the internet who think Iran should be nuked before they can build nukes of their own. Could someone from the US please reassure me that it's just a few lunatics who spend too much time online who think that?
Fortunately, at the moment, it's a product of the lunatic fringe. In a couple of years though, who knows? And yes, I'm from the US.

[ Sunday, May 14, 2006 22:26: Message edited by: Mr.Bookworm ]

--------------------
Polaris
Posts: 193 | Registered: Thursday, April 6 2006 07:00
Shake Before Using
Member # 75
Profile #26
Democide is not a typically defensible position, nor one held by more than a very small portion of the population. While the idea that we should commit an atrocity merely to avert the vague possibility of an atrocity happening in the future is out there, so is the idea of astral marriage to Sephiroth. Both are taken about equally.
Posts: 3234 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00
Shaper
Member # 5450
Profile Homepage #27
quote:
Originally written by Khoth:

I've come across some nutters on the internet who think Iran should be nuked before they can build nukes of their own. Could someone from the US please reassure me that it's just a few lunatics who spend too much time online who think that?
That's an odd question to be asking an online forum. :P

--------------------
I'll put a Spring in your step.
:ph34r:
Posts: 2396 | Registered: Saturday, January 29 2005 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #28
quote:
Originally written by Mr.Bookworm:

quote:
Originally written by Khoth:

I've come across some nutters on the internet who think Iran should be nuked before they can build nukes of their own. Could someone from the US please reassure me that it's just a few lunatics who spend too much time online who think that?
Fortunately, at the moment, it's a product of the lunatic fringe. In a couple of years though, who knows? And yes, I'm from the US.

Is there a particular reason why the president adamantly refuses to affirm that there will be no nuclear strike? Currently it sounds like "we don't intend to as such, but all options are on the table", which is somewhat reminiscent of cold-war politics...

--------------------
Encyclopaedia ErmarianaForum ArchivesForum StatisticsRSS [Topic / Forum]
My BlogPolarisI eat novels for breakfast.
Polaris is dead, long live Polaris.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
Infiltrator
Member # 6652
Profile #29
Hopefully the Iran situation will be stalled long enough for us to get someone sane back in office.

--------------------
But I don't want to ride the elevator.
Posts: 420 | Registered: Sunday, January 8 2006 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #30
Bush has suggested his brother Jeb as the next president. The position is not yet hereditary, but you have to take into account the possibility that Bush's successor will not be sane in any sense of the word...

--------------------
Encyclopaedia ErmarianaForum ArchivesForum StatisticsRSS [Topic / Forum]
My BlogPolarisI eat novels for breakfast.
Polaris is dead, long live Polaris.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #31
quote:
Originally written by Khoth:

I've come across some nutters on the internet who think Iran should be nuked before they can build nukes of their own. Could someone from the US please reassure me that it's just a few lunatics who spend too much time online who think that?
Was this a leading question? Given that Bush has suggested as much, no one can assure you of that.

Normally, I'm willing to take a step back, a look at Bush as just a typical extreme point in the pendulum of power in the US that always swings back and forth, as something that will be partially corrected for in the future.

Nuking Tehran, however, does NOT fall into that category.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
...b10010b...
Member # 869
Profile Homepage #32
quote:
Originally written by George Gammell Angell:

Bush has suggested his brother Jeb as the next president. The position is not yet hereditary, but you have to take into account the possibility that Bush's successor will not be sane in any sense of the word...
quote:
Ooo rock me Amadeus
Rock me Amadeus...
Rock rock rock rock me Amadeus
Rock me all the time to the top

Er war ein Punker
Und er lebte in der großen Stadt
Es war Wien, war Vienna
Wo er alles tat
Er hatte Schulden denn er trank
Doch ihn liebten alle Frauen
Und jede rief:
Come on and rock me Amadeus

Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, oh oh oh Amadeus

Er war Superstar
Er war populär
Er war so exaltiert
Because er hatte Flair
Er war ein Virtuose
War ein Rockidol
Und alles rief:
Come on and rock me Amadeus

Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, oh oh oh Amadeus

Come on and rock me Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, oh oh oh Amadeus

Es war um 1780
Und es war in Wien
No plastic money anymore
Die Banken gegen ihn
Woher die Schulden kamen
War wohl jedermann bekannt
Er war ein Mann der Frauen
Frauen liebten seinen Punk

Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, oh oh oh Amadeus

Come and rock me Amadeus...

Baby baby do it to me rock me
Baby baby do it to me rock me
Baby baby do it to me rock me
Ja ja ja
Baby baby do it to me rock me
Baby baby do it to me rock me
Baby baby do it to me rock me

Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, Amadeus
Amadeus Amadeus, oh oh oh Amadeus...
-- a fairly bad joke which I expect exactly one person to get

--------------------
The Empire Always Loses: This Time For Sure!
Posts: 9973 | Registered: Saturday, March 30 2002 08:00
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
Profile Homepage #33
Not me. :P

--------------------
Encyclopaedia ErmarianaForum ArchivesForum StatisticsRSS [Topic / Forum]
My BlogPolarisI eat novels for breakfast.
Polaris is dead, long live Polaris.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00
Agent
Member # 3364
Profile Homepage #34
Basic theme of the movie-

It is a chronological pictation of 'what happened when' on United 93, in the Air Traffic Control rooms, in whatever office is in charge of overseeing all airspace flight over the US(and where the order to stop all flights came from), in the news, and in the military command centers in charge of scrambling fighters on the east coast. It ended when U93 crashed.

Of course most of what happened on United 93 is left to the movie producers discression, but there were many real phone calls made from the plane which they based it on.

I would think that everything else that happend on the ground is reasonably accurate and verifiable within 'poetic license'. But I am taking it all with a grain of salt.

**SPOILERS?**
According to the movie, the military attempted to scramble fighters soon after (forgive my memory) the first or second plane hit the towers but were refused clearence by the FFA, they then scrambled their planes anyway in defiance of the order, but the planes took off on a standard scramble coordinate by mistake heading east over the ocean and then had to get clearence to even turn around. It did say that the military were not even notified that U93 was a hijacked plane untill 4 minutes after it crashed.
/end spoilers

quote:
Originally written by Drew:
Feel good about the NSA having the calling records for all phonecalls made in the US from three out of the four major phone carriers? Kind of tramples our right to privacy under the Ninth Amendment. But of course, those people outside of any public oversight would never use those records for purposes other than fighting terrorism, right? Of *course* you can trust the current administration, right? Right...
I, in truth, do not care that the government has my phone records. I'm an open person by demeanor, and would probably enjoy being on a show like Big Brother(actually Survivor's more my type). I am not concerned with my privacy and I have nothing to hide anyway. What 'other purposes' should I be worried about?

quote:
Originally written by TM:
With 9/11, it's true that a few evil men are responsible for the grievous acts.
At first I was surprised that you agreed that the terrorists were 'evil men'. Then I remembered that you think I'm evil. :P The movie does a beautiful job of portraying the hijackers, not as evil, but as devout men of the Muslim faith. They did not believe they were evil or doing evil, instead they thought they were doing the will of God. It does not make what they did any less horrific, but their motivations, imho, were not as malicious as it seems. Their actions are not that surprising considering they hold to the Old Testament, but not the New. God calling for the death of nations was not unheard of.

[ Monday, May 15, 2006 05:48: Message edited by: Jewels ]

--------------------
"Even the worst Terror from Hell can be transformed to a testimony from Heaven!" - Rev. David Wood 6\23\05

"Do all the good you can, by all the means you can, in all the ways you can, in all the places you can, at all the times you can, to all the people you can, as long as you ever can." - John Wesley
Posts: 1001 | Registered: Tuesday, August 19 2003 07:00
Lifecrafter
Member # 6403
Profile #35
quote:
Originally written by Jewels:

The movie does a beautiful job of portraying the hijackers, not as evil, but as devout men of the Muslim faith. They did not believe they were evil or doing evil, instead they thought they were doing the will of God. It does not make what they did any less horrific, but their motivations, imho, were not as malicious as it seems. Their actions are not that surprising considering they hold to the Old Testament, but not the New. God calling for the death of nations was not unheard of.
Do you think anybody thinks that what they are doing is evil and not justified in some way?

--------------------
??? ??????
???? ?????
Posts: 883 | Registered: Wednesday, October 19 2005 07:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #36
quote:
Originally written by Jewels:

Their actions are not that surprising considering they hold to the Old Testament, but not the New. God calling for the death of nations was not unheard of.
I know you didn't mean this to be a pointed remark, Jewels. But I have to say, this is a remarkably stupid way of trying to understand a religion's adherents -- to take a text which is not its central text, and then compare it to a text used by another religion.

Beyond that, though, your extrapolation doesn't hold water. The religion based primarily on the NT (Christianity) has been responsible for many attacks on other people and nations over the years, far more than the religion based primarily on the OT (Judaism). This comparison, of course, is a bit spurious, since there are so many other factors involved. But I really don't see how you can say that holding to the OT but not the NT makes their actions less surprising, not without turning a blind eye to history.

Among more relevant factors, Western attacks on Islamic states (i.e., the Crusades, certain European Empires), and clerical manipulation of the concept of the lesser jihad, both spring to mind.

[ Monday, May 15, 2006 06:24: Message edited by: Slartreuse ]

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Lifecrafter
Member # 6403
Profile #37
quote:
Originally written by Slartreuse:

Among more relevant factors, Western attacks on Islamic states (i.e., the Crusades, certain European Empires), and clerical manipulation of the concept of the lesser jihad, both spring to mind.
Just for clarification, the Crusades were originally an attempt to wipe out European Islam and Jewery, it didn't catch so well as the Church hoped (although thousands of both religions did get massacered) and it was only later focused on reclaiming the holy land. During the attacks on the holy land, though, the majority of Arabs they killed were not Muslim, they were Turks. Who, by the way, would have been more than willing to aid the Europeans, as they themselves were attempting to rid the world of Islam.

--------------------
??? ??????
???? ?????
Posts: 883 | Registered: Wednesday, October 19 2005 07:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #38
My understanding (which wikipedia seems to support) is that the Crusades were originally intended to keep at bay and/or recapture territory from various Arabs, and that the atrocities at home followed from that. (Wiki: "On a popular level, the first crusades unleashed a wave of impassioned, personally felt pious fury that was expressed in the massacres of Jews that accompanied the movement of mobs through Europe, as well as the violent treatment of "schismatic" Orthodox Christians of the east.") I don't mean to downplay those attacks at all, but they weren't the original purpose of the Crusades.

Also (and here I have virtually no knowledge) weren't many Turks Islamic? I didn't know any were trying to wipe out Islam -- which ones?

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Infiltrator
Member # 5410
Profile #39
Jewels:

quote:
I leave this topic open for comments on the movie, the events of 9/11, respect for the lost, and even some good old Bush bashing which is not far from my sentiment today.

In that vein, Noam Chomsky has released a new book, suggesting the US is a rogue state - see review here.

http://www.medialens.org/articles/book_reviews/dc_nc_rogue_states.html

Likely a good read from a left wing political perspective.

--------------------
"Dikiyoba ... is demon ... drives people mad and ... do all sorts of strange things."

"You Spiderwebbians are mad, mad, mad as March hares."
Posts: 687 | Registered: Wednesday, January 19 2005 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #40
The Crusades, in theory, were a territorial grab, not an attempted genocide. They weren't trying to wipe out Jews and Muslims; they were just trying to get them out of the Holy Land.

The supposed purpose of the Crusades and the actual purposes of the individuals involved were often at variance, as in the Fourth Crusade, which never actually made it to Israel and ended up sacking Constantinople instead.

I was under the impression that the Turks in the Middle East at the time of the Crusades were overwhelmingly Muslim.

If anyone has any information to contradict any of this, it'd be worth citing sources, because what I've just said is the way the story is normally told in the books that I've read.

EDIT: That book is not new. The copyright date on it is 2000.

[ Monday, May 15, 2006 08:10: Message edited by: Kelandon ]

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
Shaper
Member # 5437
Profile #41
I'm going to stay out of this for the most part due to personal connections. 9/11 was a terrible tragedy, much the same as any incident in history that caused several thousand deaths. America tends to hold 9/11 in a special light, and sees it as more of a tragedy than what we have inflicted on others. I feel that to be just as absurd as saying 9/11 was inconsequential due to greater numbers having died before them.

Bush has milked 9/11 for everything from bombing civilians in Iraq, his reelection, to removal of our freedom one protective measure at a time. 9/11 caused those close to where the planes hit, and those who were close to them to suffer, but it has also caused a great portion of the nation to support Bush getting away with murder.

[ Monday, May 15, 2006 09:56: Message edited by: Miya ]
Posts: 2032 | Registered: Wednesday, January 26 2005 08:00
Nuke and Pave
Member # 24
Profile Homepage #42
EDIT: Putting back in the part that TM replied to:
The reason Americans responded so strongly to 9/11 is that it awoke them to the fact that America isn't as invulnerable and omnipotent as they thought. There were some comparisons to Pearl Harbor in terms of an effect on American public. In this context, the actual death toll of the attacks isn't very relevant, although the fact that it was the largets terrorist attack of its kind can't be ignored completely.

WWI officially started after assasination of a single (although very important) person, so you could look at that as another example of the importance of attack being unrelated to death toll.

quote:
Originally written by George Gammell Angell:

...
Is there a particular reason why the president adamantly refuses to affirm that there will be no nuclear strike? Currently it sounds like "we don't intend to as such, but all options are on the table", which is somewhat reminiscent of cold-war politics...

He is trying to play bad cop with Iran while Russia and China play good cop. Unfortunately his bluff is so transparant that it's likely to do more harm than good. (A nuclear strike would probably be the only thing more likely to end a politician's career than ordering a draft. So with US military tied up in Iraq, Bush has no way to carry out his threat by either conventional or unconventional means.)

[ Monday, May 15, 2006 09:44: Message edited by: Zeviz ]

--------------------
Be careful with a word, as you would with a sword,
For it too has the power to kill.
However well placed word, unlike a well placed sword,
Can also have the power to heal.
Posts: 2649 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00
BANNED
Member # 4
Profile Homepage #43
Gavrillo Princip was a spark-- political assassinations were commonplace at the time-- which merely had such an effect because the rest of Europe had finally gathered enough firewood to incinerate itself.

Zeviz, I think we are in agreement to a certain extent, but I will further this: America already realizes that its time in the sun is over. We've already been shoveling our resources in droves to the orient, and every middle-class suburbanite realizes how out-of-place s/he has become.

Honestly. I really do want to hear what explanations people have for lunacy on this scale.

--------------------
*
Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Infiltrator
Member # 5410
Profile #44
quote:
EDIT: That book is not new. The copyright date on it is 2000.

Yes, I read it back a few years. I should have said his newest book (or more properly his most recent book).

Always an interesting read. Much of his material can also be found on the net at various sources.

TM:
quote:
but I will further this: America already realizes that its time in the sun is over. We've already been shoveling our resources in droves to the orient, and every middle-class suburbanite realizes how out-of-place s/he has become.

Wow, what a blanket statement and likely unsupportable. I would venture to say it is more correct that the vast majority of American suburbanites are blindly unaware that their nation is in decline.

I wonder too that America's strong reaction to 9/11 has a lot to do with their relative isolation from world events. Hostorically, America has kept itself out of international politics when possible and is genrally uninterested in its neighbors (even close ones like Canada) unless the neighbors have something of interest/value to themselves. 9/11 was an international event ont he American stage - an unwelcome interuption in blissful ignorance.

[ Monday, May 15, 2006 11:43: Message edited by: Molybdenum ]

--------------------
"Dikiyoba ... is demon ... drives people mad and ... do all sorts of strange things."

"You Spiderwebbians are mad, mad, mad as March hares."
Posts: 687 | Registered: Wednesday, January 19 2005 08:00
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
Profile Homepage #45
quote:
Originally written by Molybdenum:

Hostorically, America has kept itself out of international politics when possible and is genrally uninterested in its neighbors (even close ones like Canada) unless the neighbors have something of interest/value to themselves.
I would venture to say that that's not even remotely true, unless one qualifies that, either by saying that an enormous variety of countries have had something of interest or value to the U.S. over the course of the past century or so, or by saying that this is the impression that America's political leaders have wanted to convey in spite of all evidence to the contrary.

We've intervened a lot in international affairs, although we like to pretend that we haven't.

--------------------
Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens.
Smoo: Get ready to face the walls!
Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr.

Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me
The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever
Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00
BANNED
Member # 4
Profile Homepage #46
quote:
Originally written by Molybdenum:

Wow, what a blanket statement and likely unsupportable. I would venture to say it is more correct that the vast majority of American suburbanites are blindly unaware that their nation is in decline.
Call it "bliss." In a way, you may be right: I don't think anyone is seriously considering the ramifications of China's ruling the world in 20 years (or less), least of which would be the suburbanite elites. But that may be purposeful: After all, every American has to stare down her/his immense debt and come to grips with her/his own mortality. And if a member of the middle-class can push that off to the side, then s/he will.

--------------------
*
Posts: 6936 | Registered: Tuesday, September 18 2001 07:00
Raven v. Writing Desk
Member # 261
Profile Homepage #47
It isn't Chomsky's newest or most recent book, either -- he's published several new titles since then, both on politics and on linguistics.

--------------------
Slarty vs. DeskDesk vs. SlartyTimeline of ErmarianG4 Strategy Central
Posts: 3560 | Registered: Wednesday, November 7 2001 08:00
Warrior
Member # 6846
Profile #48
quote:
9/11 was a terrible tragedy, much the same as any incident in history that caused several thousand deaths. America tends to hold 9/11 in a special light, and sees it as more of a tragedy than what we have inflicted on others. I feel that to be just as absurd as saying 9/11 was inconsequential due to greater numbers having died before them.
"One death is a tragedy; a million is a statistic."
Joseph Stalin

--------------------
"Build a man a fire, and he´ll be warm for a day; set a man on fire, and he´ll be warm for the rest of his life."
Posts: 65 | Registered: Thursday, March 2 2006 08:00
Lifecrafter
Member # 6388
Profile #49
quote:
Originally written by Thuryl:

<lyrics to Rock Me Amadeus removed>
>_<
Posts: 794 | Registered: Tuesday, October 11 2005 07:00

Pages