Carol Platt Liebau: Open Thread -- First Time

Saturday, January 14, 2006

Open Thread -- First Time

My brilliant reader Kirk suggested that we give an open thread a try. Here you are, commenters -- go to it if you want to!

18 Comments:

Blogger Matthew Lazear said...

Your friend must be a dailykos.com reader :-) At any rate, if you're going to have an open forum, you should allow commenting for people that do not have a blogger.com account. Good luck, chief :-)

6:00 PM  
Blogger rabbi-philosopher said...

Carol, I do think you have some excellent insights on the social/political process. May your reach grow.

8:33 PM  
Blogger Carol Platt Liebau said...

Matthew -- I appreciate your suggestion; unfortunately, as some of my long-time readers can attest, anonymous bloggers (i.e. those without a blogger account) abused the system to the point where good taste and good sense dictated that some kind of identification be required. Sorry.

Rabbi-Philosopher -- thank you.

9:26 PM  
Blogger The Flomblog said...

I am a regular at LGF and Licianne. They both control who (or is it whom?) access their blogs. I have access to LGF (I'm OldProf) but not Lucianne.

This blog is my first stop every morning. I anticipate it getting even better with some enlightened discussion. I really have no patience with those who offer opinions ananomously. Speak your words and stand by them!

Carol - Thank you for giving me some mental breakfast each morning

8:41 AM  
Blogger Herman47 said...

From the Washington Post (Jan. 16, 2005):

KABUL, Afghanistan, Jan. 14 -- Pakistani officials said Saturday that a U.S. missile strike intended to kill al Qaeda deputy Ayman Zawahiri had missed its target but had killed 17 people, including six women and six children.

Let's see now. AT LEAST 17 people dead, including six women and six CHILDREN. No outrage at all from conservatives though, but that's not surprising. These deaths to them merely represent the "collateral damage," necessary to show the world just who's the tough kid on the block. Besides, those killed weren't Americans, and so are consequently worth much less.

Wonder how the conservatives would react though, if another country suspected that "enemy combatants" were located on American soil, and then launched a surprise bombing attack against these combatants (without first telling the American government), an attack that killed off more than twice as many Americans than "enemy combatants." Would these conservatives not be screaming like bloody hell about America's sovereignty being violated??? Would they not want retribution, given the dead Americans??? Of course they would.

And then there's the troubling thought about just how those in the Islamic world are going to react upon seeing those dead Pakistanis being buried, hearing the pained mourning and wailing for the dead children.
Consider this (also from the Washington Post):

"Tens of thousands of Pakistanis staged an angry anti-American protest near the remote village of Damadola, about 120 miles northwest of Islamabad, where Friday's attack took place. According to witnesses, the demonstrators shouted, "Death to America!" and "Death to Musharraf!" -- referring to Pakistan's president, Gen. Pervez Musharraf -- and the offices of at least one U.S.-backed aid organization were ransacked and set ablaze."

I daresay that all this might be enough to encourage at least a few Muslims to seek to avenge these deaths, to strive for jihad, to strive for martyrdom. What say you, conservatives?

9:53 AM  
Blogger The Flomblog said...

Innocent people die in wars - they always have. However as I recall it was Afgghanistan which provided the home for the Talibal and Al-Queda - who were directly involved in attacking our country.

It was a good-honest-godfearing man, President Carter, who startyed our decline. We must now pull out of it. It may not be politically correct but:

1. Our society is morally superior to the one fostered by the islamofascists.
2. If we do not kill them in the Middle East then we will hav to kill them here.
3. Unfortunately, it's better to have Pakistani innocents die than American innocents.

But when you talk about the Muslim man on the street - I suspect that you do them grave injustice.

11:24 AM  
Blogger dodger said...

I'm not so sure they were innocents. It would be nice to be able to simply target Zawahiri but if he hides in the midst of women and children??? The only basis I have is Musharef's initial reaction/admonition to the Pakastani people, "Do not harbor al quaeda in your midst."

1:27 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Dodger wrote, " I'm not so sure they were innocents."

Well, that's okay then. Blow the hell out of them, eh Dodger?

4:39 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

The Flomblog wrote, "Innocent people die in wars - they always have. However as I recall it was Afgghanistan which provided the home for the Talibal and Al-Queda - who were directly involved in attacking our country."

The Flomblog makes an interesting point. It is indisputable that Afghanistan was home to the Taliban and Al-Queda. Therefore, we should blow up innocent women and children in Pakistan.

The Flomblog's motto-One Muslim is as good as any other.

5:39 PM  
Blogger The Flomblog said...

As usual Mr. Twister is the master of the half-truth and cheap shot.

There is a huge open border between Afganistan and Pakistan. Even more pourous that our border with Mexico. Unfortunately that is not our problem. Our problem is survival ofour society. The problem is Pakistan's.

I'm an American. At least I can be intellectually honest and admit that if someone is going to die, better them than us.

I hate war. I've been in one. But I hate the prospect of living in fear even more.

6:12 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

The Flomblog protests, "As usual Mr. Twister is the master of the half-truth and cheap shot."

Not at all The Flomblog, I think you made your point fairly clear. YThe people killed in Pakistan have brought it on themselves. After all they are Muslim and they live in the wrong region of the world.

10:04 PM  
Blogger dodger said...

Mr Twister, are you in the fourth grade? Or fifth? I wish life were so simple. But it isn't. In the fourth grade you don't have to make choices of any significance. As an adult you do, not all of which are simple. Now Clinton, he made everything simple. If he saw a trouble spot he sent a couple of bombs. But Clinton wasn't/isn't an adult. Oh, by the way, Mr. Twister, I apologize. Adults don't get personal and I surely did. Sorry about that. Won't happen again.

6:42 AM  
Blogger Greg said...

herman47: "...No outrage at all from conservatives though, but that's not surprising. These deaths to them merely represent the "collateral damage," ..."

It was Democratic Senator Dianne Feinstein that used the term "collateral damage" this weekend while defending the attempt to kill Ayman al-Zawahiri.

I suppose she must be and evil conservative scumbag now.

7:06 AM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Talk about a double standard. The CIA sends a missile in to take out a suspected terrorist hide out, and ends up killing 18 people including innocent women and children. Dodger's response is, "I'm not so sure they were innocents."

In 1998 Bill Clinton sent in missiles to attack suspected terrorist hide outs in Afghanistan and a suspected al Quaeda chemical weapons factory in the Sudan with minimal casualties reported. Dodger's response, "Now Clinton, he made everything simple. If he saw a trouble spot he sent a couple of bombs. But Clinton wasn't/isn't an adult."

So to sum up--in Dodger's world if you bomb a terrorist site and kill innocent women and children, you are acting as a serious adult. If you bomb supected terrorist sites and you don't kill innocent women and children you're not an adult.

Thanks for the clarification, Dodger.

7:32 AM  
Blogger dodger said...

In 1998 Bill Clinton sent in missiles to attack suspected terrorist hide outs in Afghanistan and a suspected al Quaeda chemical weapons factory in the Sudan with minimal casualties reported.

What is a "minimal casualty?" That's has got to be the funniest line ever written. Unless its the idea that its okay to bomb a trouble spot as long as there are only "minimal casualties."

9:13 AM  
Blogger eLarson said...

The CIA sends a missile in to take out a suspected terrorist hide out, and ends up killing 18 people including innocent women and children.

The CIA dunnit? I think it really is time to take all their toys away and let them handle open-source intelligence only.

6:25 AM  
Blogger COPioneer said...

I didn't get a chance to post here since I usually stay away from computers on the weekends. But I'm not surprised that all the liberals take the same stance that seems to be to hamstring the military in defeating the enemy. Of course, they don't see any enemy. The islamo-fascists just want to be our friends. -Kirk

9:38 AM  
Blogger dodger said...

I think the appeaseniks must not hear their own words. Personally I can't imagine hearing these words coming from my mouth, "I had a chance to do the clown that killed 3000+ innocent women and children on 9/11, but...." Or "I had a chance to listen in on terrorist plans for future attacks on our country, but...."

11:42 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google