Leonard Peikoff on Fox News with O'Reilly

Fox News ^

[Talkwire]

Objectivist torchbearer Leonard Peikoff is on Bill O'Reilly's show on Fox News tonight. He logically demands we start playing hardball with ALL terrorist nations. Nuke Iran, Iraq, Syria NOW.

[nopardons]

Oh my goodness; I am TOTAL agreement with everything this gentleman sais. He was competely correct. I, for one, and sick to death of all of this " touchy-feelly " garbage I keep hearing. This is war, and wars are NOT fought with one hand tied behind our backs. If we feed the enemy, we strengthen them .

Common sense seems to be in short supply , at times. Mr. Peikoff's words were only common sense.

[Storm Orphan]

Well to Objectivism. ;^)

[lynn madison]

Re#38 I was just thinking that, as I was purusing the other threads -- namely the one talking about these protests. I hope Bush gets the message in time.

[Storm Orphan]

They are the victims.

If they have 9 to 1, then they should attack.

We can't save them from their own cowardice.

[lynn madison]

Re#44 I don't know that that's quite fair (after all, an unarmed 9-1 is not really that effective), but one thing is for sure: if we decide that it is necessary to destroy the current Iranian regime in order to defend ourselves, we cannot be concerned with the fact that some innocent people will necessarily die in the process. By definition, if it's necessary to take military action to defend ourselves, then we're saying it's our innocents, or theirs. The choice must be made.

[Clinton's a rapist]

When one is fighting for ones life, one doesn't call time outs to feed the family of the guy who is trying to kill you.

To put it another way, when you shoot, shoot to kill. Forgetting that is why we are in this mess today.

[Storm Orphan]

I agree. I hate the idea of any innocents dying.

But if you ask me to choose which side's...it's easy.

[Storm Orphan]

If it weren't for the fierce resolve of Republican leaders, Saddam Hussein would still be in power in Iraq.

Er.. uh,... that is....

[lynn madison]

Can you believe how far this country has declined? Our founding fathers responded to a _tax imposed without representation_ with the words "give me liberty, or give me death." Now, over 6,000 of our citizens are attacked on our own shores, and we can't get up enough balls to fight a real war. I'm getting depressed again when I think that Peikoff's words are so controversial.

[Storm Orphan]

Imagine how they'd respond to 47% tax rate imposed domestically.

Yet we take it like baaaaa baaaaaaa.

[nopardons]

LOL. I am NOT an " objectivist", and loathe all of Ayn Rand's books , but one. I might even dislike " ANTHEM " , if I reread it , 40 odd years AFTER my one and only read of it. : - )

That being said , I have been saying on several threads, since last night, that the end of President Bush's speech was good PR, but STUPID . It sends a VERY bad message to the children whom he asked to donate a dollar to this Oprahized charity.

As a matter of fact, I even said that we didn't send food drops on Hiroshima and Naggasaki ( sp ? ) as we were nuking them ; nor on Dresden either. That's just common sense. And, BTW , I typed this BEFORE I saw this show tonight.

[Storm Orphan]

Give Anthem a re-read. You just might like it.

Seriously, your candor is much appreciated.

[nopardons]

I don't know if Preident Bush believes this garbage, or it is just a rather clever ploy ; a bone for the mushy morons out there. I hope that it is the NOT the former.

This ridiculous cavil about " children " , that even infests FR, is turning my stomach. During the Korean War, I brought newspapers to school, for the " war effort ". I did NOT " feel " that I was REALLY doing anything of any importance, and neither did it do much good.

Sending food / money / medicine to our enemies is THE most counterproductive thing in the world. Better, by far, that they should die from starvation, pesylence, and actual war injuries. Coddling one's enemies is the death knell heard rpound the world, for us.

UNICEF has been using money raised in this country, to feed , medicate, and keep alive, millions of people around the world, who would otherwise have died, and never been a problem for us. Often, is all just winds up in some dictator's Swiss bank account, or enables a tyrant to buy more weapons, with which to harm us.It is rare that those who could use it, get much of it, if they see any of it at all.Charity is lovely, selfless , and sometimes life threatening thing.

[lynn madison]

Re#54 Perhaps not -- but I just fear that we don't have the luxury of the kind of time Bush may need to get a clue. I mean, we're talking about ANTHRAX now. Would you have ever imagined this 2 months ago? And yet we're doing lighter bombing on Friday so as not to offend our enemies?

I appreciate your optimism, though. What is it that Rand or Peikoff often said at the end of a grim prognosis? Where there's life, there's hope? I think that's it. Well, as of Friday evening, October 12, there's still life.

[lynn madison]

Did you try the non-fiction? Or just the fiction? I realize that by even asking that question I may sound like I'm proselytizing (sp?), but some people do prefer the non-fiction to the fiction. I'm just happy to see that the people of this country (even if not its politicians) are so strongly in favor of self-defense.

[nopardons]

Thanks. I am honest to a fault, and never say that which I do not mean. I let the chips fall where they may.

I loved " BRAVE NEW WORLD " , when I read it. I reread it, after seeing that it was one of Hillary's most favorite books, and figured that something was wrong with me for liking it. Well, shock of shocks ... upon rereading it, I discovered that I now found it purile, and hated it. That's the difference between reading something at 14, and as an adult.

I still like " 1984 " , after rereading that ( several times as an adult , and even teaching it. ) , so I might still like " ANTHEM ". If you like this sort of book, " WE ", by Zamitan ( sp ? ) was also one of my favorites; long , long ago. : - )

[Rightwing Conspiratr1]

Somehow I'm not comfortable thinking that Ayn Rand would advocate Peikoff's posture. Why not? Have you read Rand's position on the American Indians? Basically it boils down to that because the Indians did not believe in private land ownership, we were justified in removing them. So Rand advocates the position that countries that do not respect private property laws are illegitimate and therefore for lack of a better term, "invadable". I think Rand would have endorsed any war on a Communist/Marxist state.

[hoot2]

"Don't forget Afghanistan"

wouldn't it be better to let them "freeze" to death in their caves?
the devil will "thaw" them out in hell...