Wow! The new slur against the anti-war faction on DU is "peace purists"

[MNBrewer]

I would like to say I'm surprised, but I'm not. I'm just DISGUSTED!

[malaise]

1. Good

I am a peace purist

[MNBrewer]

2. +1

[warrant46]

176. Remember 2003 here at DU when Cheney and his cloned son started the War ?

I only lurked here then and almost everyone thought a War in Iraq was insane.

Where did all those critics go?

[go west young man]

178. We're still here....

just drowned out by the centrists who believe the current president can do no wrong.

[warrant46]

180. There are so many old names who are not

Maybe they have given up or were kicked out ?

[go west young man]

215. Too true.

There were some great writers here back then. Some still remain and post great stuff from time to time. Peace Patriot and Time For Change come to mind. The site has definitely changed. Almost all posters here were against war back then. It was what united all of us. Today I see a very different picture. There are a lot of cheerleaders for war on the site. Maybe it's time DU figured out what we really stand for because if "DU" of all places is advocating for war then the NeoCons really have won. Twice.

[tinymontgomery]

226. Well I guess this would be a good place for this song now

[warrant46]

241. Thank you That was very nice !!

[tinymontgomery]

256. Your welcome

I thought the song kind of went along with what you wrote. I've been here since 02 and it has changed a little (some would say a lot), but I still enjoy reading everything. Get most of my news from here.

[sabrina 1]

279. I remember that. The great writers that I attracted me to the site back then.

There were also many great DUers who were hysterically witty. I was terrified of Bush supporters back then, but when I found this place and saw how they mocked them, laughed at them, it made me feel so much better.

Most of them appear to have left. Maybe they are right, maybe they don't want to spend their valuable time making the same arguments on DU now, that they made against Bush on DU back then.

I don't recognize this place sometimes. It seems to have been taken over with Right Wing talking points, they don't even use NEW anti-Liberal talking points, they are using the old Bush era anti-Liberal talking points.

If this is the New Democratic Party, then I want no part of it.

[geomon666]

287. This place has definitely changed

Back at the start of the Iraq War, everyone was on the same page, the focus was laser sharp. Now, everyone seems to have their own agenda and the message hasn't gotten lost under a thousand different voices all screaming for something different.

[go west young man]

288. Totally agree with you Sabrina.

The Beatles song is fitting as the site has changed, sadly. It speaks volumes about how far the country has swung to the right when the largest liberal site has loads of posters advocating for war. I would love to see a truly liberal antiwar progressive underground. I think the term "democratic" might be past it's sell by date.

The situation kinda reminds me of how MTV, which was once cool in the early 80's, was alive with new bands from around the globe and it seemed like with Live Aid the world would change for the better, then eventually MTV morphed into an inane spew of bombastic "reality" crapola and self absorbed talentless music. I see DU as similar. It supports my theory that in an unregulated capitalist society the cream doesn't rise to the top. The crap does. Money trumps all. And we all are worse off in the long run.

[andlor]

317. +1

[Ocelot]

329. Supporters of a war with Syria are not "centrists"

Since 91% of the American people see through this bullshit, the cheerleaders for a war with Syria belong to the extremist faction, exemplified by the likes of Rumsfeld & Cheney. They're as far-right as far-right can be. And I don't care if Kerry supports them or not... he supported the Iraq war, which was also WRONG.

Obama is the worst Democratic President, ever.

[AverageJoe90]

233. Sad thing is, this is different.

We had NO real evidence, at that time, that Saddam had any WMDs in Iraq, at all. OTOH, we DO know that Assad HAS resorted to using chemical weapons from time to time(even if AQ and the Salafis have, too, which does seem to be possible, IMO)

[warrant46]

239. The evidence may be better but unless someone actually

occupies the place, the outrage will go on.

Dropping a few bombs won't really stop much (Ever hear of an Arc Light)

[awoke_in_2003]

263. Air forces can't win wars...

but they have gloriously expensive toys that make people richer.

[warrant46]

274. Absolutely !!

Blowing up a couple of gas storage sites is not only irresponsible for any one who happens to be the vicinity like children and certainly won't give you "Mission Accomplished"

[truedelphi]

291. Average Joe 90, how is it that the USA possesses the moral authority at this point

to go in and punish anyone anywhere for a single gas attack?

Our government uses Depleted Uranium. We did this under Clinton, and then under Bush, and now under Obama in Afghanistan.

We use napalm, we use phosphorous. We put people into torturous stress positions until they DIE!

People in Vietnam died of terrible cancers, for years after we left, because of our government's deliberate genocidal use of dioxin and Agent Orange to defoliate the nation of Vietnam. Now depleted uranium is doing that genocidal work, all over the land in Serbia, Afghanistan and Iraq..

Some 1.4 million people are dead in Iraq, who would probably be alive if we had not had the audacity to keep the MIC and its big wheels for profit churning, while showing the world that we could not only invent reasons for war, our elected officials could extend a war for a decade or more, if they wanted to.

[xocet]

292. Sadly, our "moral" authority is derived purely from that concept that might makes right. n/t

[Why Syzygy]

294. The neo-cons

certainly DID know Iraq had chemical weapons.. HAD being operative. They sold them to Saddam.

Who hasn't used chemical weapons in that area? Please name names of these innocents.

[arikara]

298. Killing little kids will never help

And that's who gets hurt in these stupid wars. Never the creators.

Peace.

[robinlynne]

333. We're here. just quiet for a day or two.

[LongTomH]

54. Plus one zillion!

[polichick]

62. Me too - true blue liberal peacenik...

Our country needs a Dept. of Peace BIG TIME!

[mike_c]

71. bingo....

Me too.

[Generic Other]

74. Peace

[malaise]

174. That's beautiful

[AsahinaKimi]

230. Sugoii!

Wonderful.

[Fearless]

125. +1

[Rockyj]

212. I am a Peace Purist too!

No to Military Industrial Complex! No to killing of innocent people!

[joeybee12]

3. Gotta give 'em credit for the quickness of their slurs...

I guess that's what happens when you don't have facts and want to simply argue.

[Bluenorthwest]

224. See I was thinking it was a tired retread in a moment where new rhetoric would really help them

'Purist' is so overused that it lacks all grounding in reality. As if any of us was purely anything! It's old, boring, and I'm greatly disappointed in the trope troupe of the Center/Right crowd.

[marions ghost]

4. That is just funny

---and the opposite is...war purists?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

10. +1

[pinboy3niner]

14. Did you miss the festival this year?

Warpurist Night was da bomb!

[marions ghost]

24. obviously missed it

I didn't get to Burning Man & I don't do online warring...(except at DU)

So

[HardTimes99]

195. I thought you might be being clever in a Wagnerian sense and punning

on 'Walpurgisnacht'.

Maybe I'm too clever for my own good

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/walpurgis+night?show=0&t=1377634514

(See definition #2)

[pinboy3niner]

201. Yes, I was playing off that

Maybe I should have included a link or something.

Walpurgis Night
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walpurgis_Night

[HoneychildMooseMoss]

296. Great pun!

"Warpurist Night"

[idwiyo]

18. Opposite is Armchair Warrior aka Keyboard Commando aka Internets Marine.

They are easy to recognise.

[marions ghost]

32. Keyboard Commando

has a kind of South Park snark to it--I can imagine Cartman doing it.

"La la la...lookin for some online peace lovers to stalk...respect mah authoriteh"

Here we go again.....................................................

[NuclearDem]

67. I thought 101st Chairborne was the best.

[SaveOurDemocracy]

122. That is brilliant! Thanks, never saw that 1 before. :o)

Another proud peace purist checking in.

[idwiyo]

139. Perfect, am so going to use it from now on!

[marions ghost]

281. Good one

[backscatter712]

79. Electronic chickenhawks!

Chickenhawk isn't an epithet to be used exclusively against Republicans anymore. It's for any jerkwad who's cheerleading for yet another useless, destructive war, who's not immediately enlisting in the armed forces to help fight it.

[idwiyo]

135. K&R Abso-fucking-lutly!

[NealK]

237. You nailed it.

[Nite Owl]

264. Amen to that

sending those missiles are going to kill innocent people, Assad knows they are coming and will be in some hidey hole.
Money spent on this shit while we starve ourchildren? Such great values we have. I'll be a 'peace purist' and time and be proud of it.

[bvar22]

101. Keyboard Commando

[idwiyo]

141. I am stealing this one for feature use! Priceless!

[WorseBeforeBetter]

155. !

How fitting. I can't wait for Lieutenant Spandan and Captain Cesca to show up... it's just a matter of time.

[sarge43]

166. 82nd Chairbound and 101st Screaming Chickenhawks

My apologies to anyone who jumps out of perfectly good aircraft to get shot at.

[idwiyo]

255. ...

[Scootaloo]

227. Corrupt Warmongers

[marions ghost]

284. If only we could send them to

Corruption Island - where corrupt politicians and warmongers are banished to forever upon conviction

This initially deserted island would be in the middle of the ocean surrounded by 4 battleships. Upon sentencing of the politician, they would be taken to the island by helicopter and the helicopter would hover 50 feet above the island. The highest ranked ultimate fighting champion would be there to help the politician off the helicopter by punching him in the face, knocking the him off the helicopter and if the guy survives the fall he would have to live/survive on the island for the rest of his life.

(Reddit)
------------

Buddhist version--buried up to the neck in quicksand while listening to a thousand dried seed pods rattling in the wind...

[Segami]

5. How quickly they forget past criminal lies......but hey, lets do it again!

Peace purist?......yes!

[leftstreet]

6. War porn brings out the worst in some people

Hate seeing it here

[MNBrewer]

13. Those who are foaming at the mouth for the US to something... ANYTHING

to hit the Assad Regime for this postulated chemical weapons use is pretty evident in DU. Even though we don't know if they were actually used or even by whom.

[bullsnarfle]

80. Ha! Reminds me of M*A*S*H*...

the episode where they are being shelled (ours? theirs? who knows...), and Frank Burns is screaming like a little girl as usual, going "We've got to do something...anything!".
Hawkeye looks over at him, disgusted, and says "Oh yeah Frank, that's great...you do 'something' and I'll do 'anything'.

I think about that exchange a lot lately...

[rwsanders]

249. That show was brilliant. I was gung-ho to join the Navy at 15 and watched MASH from then until 18..

It changed my mind.

[marions ghost]

17. Gets em all a-quiver

--war lust.

[Marr]

106. In authoritarians.

It's not a coincidence that it's all the usual suspects who are happily bobbing their heads to the war drum.

[Maedhros]

126. They feel like they lack power over their own lives,

so they anticipate experiencing power vicariously through a proxy: the U.S. military and it's dreamy CIC.

[leftstreet]

145. There's often a creepy racial element, too

Imagine if the UK or Germany allegedly used chem weapons on its citizens

The War Pornicators would be strangely silent, unsure how to respond

But since the US tends to war on impoverished un-white people, the drums start beating right away

[Maedhros]

149. All of our military interventions in the last decade are sold to the American people

by stoking racist sentiments.

You see, "they" (i.e. Middle Easterners) flew planes into the World Trade Center, so we are going to make "them" pay - by invading Afghanistan, destroying Iraq, threatening Iran, bombing Libya and now bombing Syria.

Wait - what? The people who crashed planes into our buildings weren't from any of those places? Huh. Well, that don't matter. "They" are all the same.

[leftstreet]

153. Race, poverty, religion

The US keeps stoking those fires at home - so the mirrored foreign policy goes down easy

[rwsanders]

250. The "spreading democracy" sale pitch is from the same racist source...

I can't say enough about the book "The Imperial Cruise" but there was a strong sentiment at the beginning of the 20th century that still endures that says "they" aren't mature enough to handle democracy, so we must guide them into it until "they" become as enlightened and "civilized" as us.

[Maedhros]

253. Isn't that what they used to call the "White Man's Burden?" [n/t]

[MattBaggins]

336. We are fulfilling Bin Laden's Dream

He wanted chaos and upheaval so that the Islamic Extremists could gain power.


He knew we would take the rope and hang ourselves.

[Maedhros]

337. Well, our best intentions failed in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya...

...but I'm certain that everything will work out THIS TIME.

[pscot]

7. We were called Peaceniks

back in the day. It's an honorific, though they think it's a slur. Often used by those in no danger of being shot at themselves..

[idwiyo]

8. I am a peace purist. What other kind of peaceniks are there?

[Cali_Democrat]

9. ???

When did this new slur come about? I haven't seen it anywhere on DU.

[MNBrewer]

19. Right here

Syria's Assad and regime DESERVE everything they're about to get from the U.S. And the West

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023540036

Quoting the entire OP:

"Obama and team have been circumspect about getting involved in this conflict. But when the guy has just gassed thousands of his own people, he has got to go.

People who are not in positions of governance and power can enjoy the luxury of always opposing any interventions. Leaders of powerful nations do not have that luxury.

This is a horrible situation in Syria, and Assad has demonstrated amply why other countries should act to stop the slow bleed of this war where literally any action against civilians is on the table for that dictator.

It's funny to imagine what you peace purists would have said when the U.S. Was about to go to war with Germany and the concentration camps were gassing millions of Jews."

[LondonReign2]

35. What a surprise

that that came from one of the sycophants on my ignore list

[iamthebandfanman]

42. OMG ONE PERSON!

that means everyone who is in support of the intervention of the gassing of children must say it too!!
smh

jesus Christ alrmighty. seriously guys?

[meegbear]

45. +1

[Stuckinthebush]

307. I know

Hyperbole much?

This place gets more reactionary every day.

[UTUSN]

342. +2 n/t

[valerief]

53. Thanks. That OP is another one for my Ignore list. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

72. Here's a slight re-write of that post--

Obama and team have been circumspect about sticking our dicks into a meat grinder. But when the guy has just gassed thousands of his own people, he has got to go. Had he only used an approved weapon like napalm….

People who are not in positions of governance and power can enjoy the luxury of always declining the chance to kill lots of people for no good reason. Leaders of powerful nations do not have that luxury. They have to recognize that the enemy of our enemy is our friend, even when he is our enemy and engaged in trying to kill us elsewhere.

This is a horrible situation in Syria, and Assad has demonstrated amply why other countries should act to stop the slow bleed of this war where literally any action against civilians is on the table for that dictator. Assad lacks the decency to limit himself to humane methods of warfare, like double-tapping targets with drones in order to take out the emergency medical responders.

It's funny to imagine what you peace purists would have said when the U.S. Was about to go to war with Germany and the concentration camps were gassing millions of Jews--even though we were blind to the Holocaust, were busy turning away Jews seeking asylum here, and went to war for totally different reasons.

[warrant46]

277. An awesome rewrite from up Nort !!

[totodeinhere]

73. It was a legitimate point of view until they got to the "peace purists" part.

I would disagree with it however simply because any military action that we take, however limited in scope, runs the very real danger of destabilizing the region even more and making the plight of innocent civilians that we are purporting to help even worse.

We need to face the grim reality that sometimes terrible things happen in this word that we simply are not in a position to do anything about.

[MNBrewer]

76. and sometimes those things happen within our own borders

but they're not "outragey" enough....

[4Q2u2]

108. Not to mention that we will be Fighting with Al Qaida.

Do we really want to give them anything that will help them succeed in installing a Holy Republic of Syria? How many innocents will die under that tyranny.

[WilliamPitt]

86. Deploying Godwin's Law...

"It's funny to imagine what you peace purists would have said when the U.S. Was about to go to war with Germany and the concentration camps were gassing millions of Jews."

Godwin’s Law is an internet adage that is derived from one of the earliest bits of Usenet wisdoms, which goes “if you mention Adolf Hitler or Nazis within a discussion thread, you’ve automatically ended whatever discussion you were taking part in.”

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/godwins-law

[MNBrewer]

88. Godwin Co-efficient of Zero in that one

[HardTimes99]

200. LMFAO. This photo is some priceless shit. - nt

[WorseBeforeBetter]

92. That poster has an impressive Transparency page.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=298088&sub=trans

Interesting how at one time this...

"It's funny to imagine what you peace purists would have said when the U.S. Was about to go to war with Germany and the concentration camps were gassing millions of Jews."

...would have been construed as "Freeper," with pizza served. Now it's coming from the BOG, supposedly within the party, and evidently it's A-OK.

[Marr]

112. That is so true. The exact same sentiment was rightly recognized as

right-wing jingoism a few short years ago. Now it's just fine and dandy and pragmatic.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

131. It'll be the same tedious 30 (give or take)...

[QC]

134. A poster by that name was banned a few years back

for engaging in constant personal attacks and such.

Not sure if it's the same person, but the resemblance is truly remarkable.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

152. I hadn't made that connection...

but it's pretty amazing what some get away with, and for as long as they do (like SouthernYankeeBelle).

Suggesting DUers would be OK with the gassing of Jews is a perfect example as to why I have only four on ignore. Take your chances with me, please.

[noiretextatique]

236. +1000

there is a lot of this happening here now. DU seems almost purged of the zimmerman apologists/racists though. good job on that team DU.

[Maedhros]

127. Assad gassed "thousands?"

It was only "hundreds" yesterday. Will it be "millions" tomorrow?

[Blanks]

196. There is only one DU rec for that thread.

Although there are quite a few comments. I'd hardly classify that as being over run by pro-war types.

[MNBrewer]

198. Did I do that?

Reread the OP.

"Wow! The new slur against the anti-war faction on DU is "peace purists"
I would like to say I'm surprised, but I'm not. I'm just DISGUSTED!"

Where, exactly, did I "classify that (DU) as being over run by pro-war types"?

[Blanks]

204. No, you didn't.

I was just surprised to see a thread with so much activity swirling about - over, what appears to be the sentiment of one or two people.

I just assumed it was a little more widespread since so many seemed to take it to heart.

My apologies.

[MNBrewer]

206. Thank you

I'm so sick and tired of seeing the "purist" label being used as a slur here on DU. To see it attached to Peace was TOO MUCH!

[NealK]

245. We have to fight Assad over there, so we don't have to fight him over here.

Let's stop the U.N investigation, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a Sarin cloud.

[one_voice]

320. WOW....

ONE person with TWO recs...

Makes a new slur, doesn't take much to rankle you guys.

Y'all need thicker skin. ya, sound like perpetual victims, really.

[bowens43]

22. It's here, I've seen it

[JoePhilly]

23. Just what we'd expect an ...

authoritarian nazi-facilitating sycophant to say about this heinous crime.

[Bluenorthwest]

64. God how out of place is that emoticon on this thread. War, chemical weapons, 'rofl'.

Wow.

[JoePhilly]

75. You should alert on my inappropriate use of :rofl:

btw ... this thread isn't about war or the use of chemical weapons ...

This thread is about nothing ... it could not be more of a META thread.

The folks who scream about the evil "authoritarians" are very upset because some one (one of the authoritarians I must assume) came up with the term "peace purist".

And now ... the only thing funnier than the actual topic of the OP, is your post complaining about my the use of ...



... within the thread.

Which earns another ...



... and a bonus ...

[bvar22]

189. Reminds me of that weird guy in the back at the movies,

...the one who constantly giggles uncontrollably during gruesome violence or rape scenes.

[Rain Mcloud]

228. OMG,The Preacher's Son!

I must have been 12 years old when my vacation bible school group took a field trip to the movies.
The Late Great Planet Earth was showing.
I kept getting kneed in the chair back and there was a kind of smacking sound.
He was behind me masturbating while Hal Lindsay was connecting the events of Armageddon with the schizophrenic hallucinations in The Book of Revelations.
This may have been my first of many crisis' of faith.

Looking back,I have to wonder if the minister had been molesting his son.
Guess i better sleep with the lights on again tonight lest i hear those disturbing noises and hurt myself running down the hall again.

[libodem]

11. I'll take it

Name call away. I accept the label with pride. I'm a peacenik from the 60's.

[ChazInAz]

323. Same here.

I'm proud of the title. Got my battle scars at the '68 Chicago Democratic Convention, and will always have the same dedication to peace.

[libodem]

328. .

[Nuclear Unicorn]

12. I happily confess

Though I am left to wonder -- how many who opposed war under Bush were never our allies, merely unprincipled political opportunists?

[Bigmack]

15. "Peace purists" ignore all the good things that have come from our recent wars....

.......

I'm stuck here... Anybody got any good things...?

[rurallib]

116. we found out there was more than one sect of Muslims

[Fumesucker]

158. War is God's way of teaching Americans geography -Ambrose Bierce

[leveymg]

186. Nice words for nasty things: "stress positions", "renditions", "collateral damage", "friendly fire"

and some really funny images:

?imgmax=800

[Blanks]

197. The fake turkey is still my favorite. What a putz. eom

[leveymg]

203. That, the codpiece, and Hillary's Napoleonic revival tunic.

Just the the attire for commanding dress-up wars fought at a very safe distance.

[HooptieWagon]

205. Dont forget the fake ranch.

and the fake uniform. Everything about him was shallow and fake. And for some reason, god only knows, the current POTUS wants to embrace his hated policies.

[leveymg]

218. I think the incumbent will carry out the same policy, even if he doesn't want to.

It comes with the job - there are rules for POTUS that outlast any particular incumbent. One is, don't get in the way of ongoing secret wars and regime changes.

"Now is the time", I guess they've been telling him. What are you waiting for?

[rdharma]

16. I am a "peace purist" too!

I'm sorry that Syria is being torn apart by a civil war. And I'm sorry that the government has stooped to the use of chemical warfare on their own citizens.

But I'll be damned if I think the US should get involved in this mess.

Our first mistake was supplying the rebels with military hardware and weaponry (effectively taking sides in the conflict).

[HumansAndResources]

297. "Get Involved?"

It is easy to tell the "organic" movements - peaceful unarmed demonstrators tortured and butchered while the USA does nothing and the Corporate Press stifles the story - see Bahrain and Saudi Arabia.

Then there are the "armed" uprisings and arson, combined with slick-propaganda points put together by Billionaire-Think-Tanks that are aired on national and international TV, topped with "covert aid" from "our" (sic - Transnational Corporate) allies coordinated by the CIA (Bengazi).

I think Syria clearly falls into the latter category.

[bowens43]

20. it is disgusting,as are those who use it

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

21. You must understand...that wars fought with good intentions aren't really wars.

And, the casualties are "unfortunate".

Of course, it's pretty difficult to find a war in which both sides had "good intentions".

[hrmjustin]

25. I would rather be a peace purist than a warmonger.

[Arctic Dave]

26. The smack of calling them "Cruise Missile Liberals" has them lashing out.

They are all about massaging their conscience as a "humanitarian" but or more likely driven by the portfolios.

Now is a great time to by stock in war toys.

[Puzzledtraveller]

51. ^^YES^^

[WorseBeforeBetter]

102. Anyone know how far back that goes?

Vanden Heuvel and Scahill used it recently, and we all know that Scahill is one of the the BOG's favorite "racists." A quick Google turned this up from 1999:

The Guardian (London) - March 30, 1999

....

The most tragic aspect of the cruise missile liberals is that they assume every Serb is a supporter of the Milosevic atrocities. Yet only two years ago mass demonstrations in Belgrade came close to overthrowing him. Now the most courageous opponents of his tyranny are in air-raid shelters.

....

http://www.leftbusinessobserver.com/CruiseLibs.html

[Zorra]

27. Yes. it is no surprise that warmongering RWers would call DU progressives "peace purists".

The term probably originated at either free republic or Third Way HQ.

[MNBrewer]

33. First I saw was right here in good ol' DU

In an OP with a Godwin co-efficient of zero.

[OnlinePoker]

85. I don't know about the freepers but I have gone on Ann Coulter

Except for one guy who has been in favor of bombing Assad since 2007, they are all against any strike. They were also against arming the rebels, but only because they think Obama is a Muslim and wants to create a new caliphate in the Middle East.

[PowerToThePeople]

28. Peace Purist here, checking in...

[randome]

29. Why not debate the original poster instead of starting yet another thread on the subject?

[hr][font color="blue"][center]Don't ever underestimate the long-term effects of a good night's sleep.[/center][/font][hr]

[Bluenorthwest]

68. Did you look at that thread? Plenty of people not only debated but insturcted the OP in historical

fact the OP has gotten all wrong. I think it is time to stand up to this crap from the crap vendors and war mongers. They want to name call, it should be pointed out and the political cohort of those name callers need to be asked to defend or condemn the crap being done.
People need to be warned about this shit, and those who purvey it need to called out for doing so. If you don't like it, debate me on the merits or start another thread, it is a discussion board.

[treestar]

95. This one is meant to obtain sympathy

for the horrid victimization of one other poster using the term "peace purist" to describe anyone who is against any US intervention no matter what is happening in Syria.

[JoePhilly]

107. Welcome to META UnderGround

[Marrah_G]

30. That is so fucked up

[snooper2]

31. One post does not a meme make

but you got to start a cool new OP!

[Bobbie Jo]

98. Some are prone to

exaggeration around here.

Oh the drama.

[Egalitarian Thug]

34. Don't sweat it. All this means is that this kind of thing bugs the crap outta them,

so they naturally believe that it bothers us as well.

[MNBrewer]

47. It's actually beneficial, for bulking up my ignore list

The transphobes were last week, the pro-war faction this week.

[Xithras]

36. It's a repeating pattern here on DU.

The war drums start beating. Some DU'ers jump on the bandwagon believing that this war is a "good war". A bit later things go sideways, and the supporters either pretend that they didn't support it in the first place, vanish, or claim that there was "no way to know". Either way, everyone swears that they'll never support another war.

And then the drums start beating again, and the whole process starts over.

I am a peace purist. There is no such thing as a good war. The day that you accept war as a viable option is the day that you decide that politics are more important than the lives of human children.

[Maedhros]

132. When Daddy gets his gun, we all have to stand behind Daddy [n/t]

[Marr]

37. I know-- it's sickening. They've become indistinguishable from the Bush Bots of yesterday.

No different at all. Just unthinking, blindly loyal, belligerent halfwits, attacking anyone who might disagree with Dear Leader as a matter of reflex.

[MisterP]

113. "George W. Bush, minus the belief that 'queering causes hurricanes' "

[iamthebandfanman]

38. link?

Nevermind, I see it was ONE person (yes , that's everyone whos for some sort of intervention to the gassing of children).

wow, get your feelings hurt much to whine about one person and broad brush an entire group ??

[MNBrewer]

39. see post #19

above.

edit. I never said all of DU was using this slur.

Just that it was the newest one. Glad you enjoy vaporized humans. you're about to get a lot of them courtesy of the US Military.

[iamthebandfanman]

44. i saw

and changed the content of my msg to reflect it


you should take a read :p

[Segami]

40. Here....

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023540036

[iamthebandfanman]

46. Wow a whole one person?

well gee golly, that means anyone whos for the intervention of children being gassed must think and say it too!


really you guys? REALLY?

[Bluenorthwest]

70. I don't see any of the other pro war folks calling out the bullshit that is that OP

And silence is often definitive.

[iamthebandfanman]

105. labeling folks who want action

against someone gassing children 'pro war' is a joke .... and just as bad/stupid as someone making the phrase 'peace purist'

I guess you know of a way to talk them out of gassing women and children?

[Bluenorthwest]

130. And yet it is not just one person on that thread advocating military action. 'Just one' you said.

And here they are again, not criticizing the verbiage of 'peace purist' but instead advocating military solutions no matter what, no matter where.
Not one of those advocating military action criticized the term 'peace purists'. Many did however, take up the OP's position and defend it.
It is what it is. When you are advocating military action, you are being pro war. Perhaps reluctantly, but nevertheless when you say 'lets' bomb' you are being pro war. If you can't accept that, you should not advocate war.

And here is a bit of information. When I was a child I was in the region for a set of events involving a terror attack that killed mostly children, which was followed by military response by air and on the ground against Syria. I have spent days and nights actually listening to the bombs falling on Syria. As usual the bombs were killing kids who had done nothing to 'revenge' the killing of other kids who had done nothing. A 40 year vicious cycle. 'They killed kids so lets' kills some in return' gets to be old and tired. So I'm not savoring hearing about even more bombs falling on even more kids who did nothing. The bombs 40 years ago did not stop the gassing, did it? The continued conflict, civil and otherwise in Syria did not stop the gassing, did it? And this bombing won't stop it either. You can think that it will, but history does not support that view. If we really want to make change there, we need to commit the entire will of our nation, thousands of troops and billions of dollars, anything less is just another chapter in a sad story filled with dead kids.
I was say, 14 and almost all the deaths on both sides at that time were kids. Not one of the fuckers on either side who killed were kids, they were all adults and all of them claimed they were killing to make peace. 'We are right to do this, because they were wrong to do that!' they announce. Then they do some killing of civilians, children, women, who it's all fodder.
Nevertheless I'm sure you take all of this very seriously and your snarky reductive attitude is intended to make peace and understanding.
I'll never forget the sound of the shelling.
Now tell me of your experiences in the region.

[treestar]

93. One is enough to make them victims of mean DUers

who don't agree with them. I bet if you did a search on any of these posters, you would not find, however, that they have a problem dishing it out, with much worse.

[iamthebandfanman]

109. Most of them label folks 'pro war'

just because they want action against someone gassing women and children ... which in my opinion is just as bad/stupid as the phrase 'peace purist'..

I suppose theres a way to talk him out of doing it ? because hes listened so far ?

[treestar]

117. just look below

"war perverts"

just like being pro Big Brother for thinking some information should stay classified and that those who know about it with real problems would at first use the channels created in the WPA.

[iamthebandfanman]

123. mob mentality

rules DU these days.

They talk alike, they walk alike, they even sometimes laugh alike! (spin on the old patty duke song)

reminds me of my youth and folks arguing about who was punk enough back when I was into the punk/ska scene

what I love about it is , when each one posts even more upset and angry about this ONE poster who used a silly phrase, they add their own opinions and accusations full of broad brush silliness.

[Bluenorthwest]

144. Wow. 'what I love about this'. I find nothing lovable or admirable in any of this, not the story

and not the constantly divisive exploitation of the issue. I love nothing about this. At least you admit you dig it, love it in fact. Smiley faces, 'what I love about this' and some 'rofl' emoticons seem to sum up the argument from one side in this discussion.
Hard to believe anyone would type 'what I love about this' about well, this. Allow me to say 'barf'.

[iamthebandfanman]

146. Yes, i literally meant

it brings me joy.
I was being sarcastic. I think its moronic.

Yes, our want to stop the gassing of women and children is all about smiley faces and emoticons. glad you've been paying attention.


got any more over the top statements and accusations to make?

[Bluenorthwest]

222. Your words sit there, like the stain they are.

Anyone can read them and see how out of place they are in a thread about such a deeply horrific issue.
The way you wave about 'women and children' as banners for your agenda is more of the same exploitation without respect for the intensity of this situation. But as you say, you love it. Smiley face, rofl emoticon, etc.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

194. What non-violent "action" are you suggesting?

[MyNameGoesHere]

163. Children being gassed, children ripped from incubators, he gassed his own people blah blah blah

Roll out the pigs of war. Social media says it's killin time. Yippee! Let's kill some more.

[treestar]

172. It's equally as foolish to claim nothing ever happens

You believe that nothing has really happened in Syria and there really are no chemical weapons there and no such thing was ever used?

If there were, are you saying we should do nothing?

People need to come out and admit it if they think nothing should be done here.

[MyNameGoesHere]

257. Yes do nothing

We relinquished the crown of democratic snobbery when we jumped into made up wars. Were Americans attacked on American soil? Did Obama go to congress and declare war? Do you really have the killing itch that bad?

[treestar]

280. Americans attacked on American soil

If that is your standard, then you were all for the war in Afghanistan, right? And for the "War on Terror?"

[MyNameGoesHere]

285. neither

They are fake made up wars. Show me the declaration of war that passed congress. You can't. And the "president can start an war he wants to" resolution was illegal.

[treestar]

300. Things aren't illegal just because you don't agree with them

Many political decisions I don't agree with are made. I recognize that I don't agree but they still are made under the Constitution and are legal.

Americans were attacked on American soil on 911. Thus by your standard the war in Afghanistan should have been "legal."

[MyNameGoesHere]

304. By the constitutions standard

Your statement is somewhere in the loon zone. Start a war, need congress approval and funding. Simple really. Try it.
Or I suppose you're one of those that thinks the president is above the law?

[treestar]

305. Your response makes no sense

The Constitution is played out in the War Powers act and declarations of war by Congress. Thus it is possible for there to be a "legal" war. The President has his powers in these laws but of course is not above it. Again "the law" is more than just my opinion. I know I can't label a thing "illegal" just because I politically don't agree with it.

[n2doc]

41. Well if people want to hurl insults...

I call them the "Cruise Missile Liberals" (read on another blog)

[Glitterati]

43. Peace purist checking in

we can't feed our poor, but we can afford to bomb the shit out of Syria?

Fuck. that. shit.

[DontTreadOnMe]

110. Really... that is how you see the world?

Food vs bombs?

I kink it might be a little more complicated than that... thus the "purist" term as being a negative tone.

Save the children? oh.. only the ones over here. I get it now.

"War should always be avoided"... usually comes from the side that lost.

[Glitterati]

115. Yes

Just.

Yes.

I won't even dignify the rest with a response.

[DontTreadOnMe]

119. You have a Naive World View

And I guess you call the Dem leaders like Obama, Hillary and Kerry war criminals too, right? Should we add Roosevelt as a war criminal too?

[Glitterati]

121. And, you're just looking for a fight.

*plonk* into my ignore file.

Wave that right wing teabagger flag, honey!

[one_voice]

321. Jesus Christ.

Disagreement= right wing teabagger. WTF?

This ISN'T freerepublic. What's differentiates us from them, is we're ALLOWED/SUPPOSED to have different opinions.

What the hell is going on around here?!?

[idwiyo]

261. I take it you will be one of the first ones to put your comfortable boots on the ground?

Please, don't forget to post daily describing your heroic acts!

[GeorgeGist]

262. You kink we won any wars lately?

[lark]

48. I'll be sure to let my family know I've got a new designation.

I like peace purist much better than the old label, bleeding heart liberal, or anti-war activist, more succinct and more accurate. Thanks!!

[railsback]

49. I call them humanitarian hypocrites

'peace purists' doesn't make sense.

[Puzzledtraveller]

50. A surprising amount of who were also against the NSA et al.

Seems like an effort to marginalize real liberals. Could just be my imagination. I am a NSA critic and war critic. But because I have isolationist tendencies regarding war I'm probably just a paulite who got lost, or at least that's what I would be called by some here.

[kestrel91316]

52. Oh, is that what went out in today's memo? I wondered what happened to the

trans poutragers and various and sundry other obsessively posting haters.

I expect that's what 50% of DU will consist of for a couple of days now - "peace purists" this, and "peace purists" that.

And next week it will be something else entirely. "Peace purists" will vanish just like all the Manning posts.

[MNBrewer]

56. trans poutrage?

what do you mean?

[kestrel91316]

61. I mean the piling on, shitstirring, and vicious attacks against good, longstanding DUers

over pronoun errors or uncertainty.

It has all vanished today, which I find very curious. Not a single post about Manning or that whole thing that I can see.

It's like somebody said it's time to move on to the next topic to divide Dems.

[MNBrewer]

63. OK... welcome to my ignore list based on your use of "trans poutrage"

have a nice life.

[kestrel91316]

65. Fine with me. I am not referring to legitimate outrage against legitimate transphobia.

I am referring to the phony outrage by shitstirrers.

[Bluenorthwest]

78. And in doing so you are claiming to be the standard bearer and judge of what is 'legitimate' and

that which is not. Two things, what gives you standing to present yourself as the decider of that which is legitimate, and second why don't you give examples of that which in your wisdom is 'legitimate' and that which in the eyes of a straight, cis, professional person is 'phony'. Running about making vague and heavily loaded accusations against unnamed DUers is cowardly and McCarthyite.
I mean, you come on to this thread and bring up Chelsea Manning. What's your motive for that level of off topic ranting? Disgusting behavior.

[theHandpuppet]

259. "I am referring to the phony outrage by shitstirrers"

Pot, meet kettle.

[morningfog]

185. A new front of war seems a worthy topic of discussion.

But I will add that your use of "trans poutrage" is disgusting. See, we can do both.

Funny how you always end up opposite the liberal left side of the issues.

[NealK]

252. Trans poutrage?

WTF?

[idwiyo]

266. You forgot to mention your unconditional support for LGBTQ rights and how all them mean

'trans poutragers' just wouldn't leave you alone.

[Vanje]

290. WTF!?!

Imminent war with Syria is not a worthy topic??!

You have a hang-up.

[QC]

55. That's what happens when a progressive site

undergoes a right wing takeover.

Peace becomes bad, corporate supremacy becomes sensible pragmatism, blanket surveillance becomes a good thing, etc.

This is a very different DU from the one a few of us joined back in 2001.

[MNBrewer]

57. I used to like smirkingchimp.... but I guess that was too "confrontational"

[QC]

82. Confrontation is neither pragmatic nor sensible. n/t

[Caretha]

269. I was thinking

the same thing. I joined SmirkingChimp in 2001 - my sis convinced me DU was better so I lurked until 2002 and joined. Damn I miss the real dems.

Somehow it feels like this place took a right turn, and I feel very much out in the cold.

[Kelvin Mace]

58. *sigh*

Some people always seem to think that their little burst of violence is "justified" and certainly when you have a dictator using chemical weapons against his own people, it seems more than justified.

Here's the problem:

We are hardly in a position to make moral judgments in situations like this, especially since OUR hands are dirty.

1) We illegally waged wars of aggression based on laughable justification.

2) We have committed war crimes against civilian populations (torture, murder, kidnapping, false imprisonment). Currently we are STILL illegally detaining innocent people (cleared by law enforcement agencies and the military of any wrong doing) in the Guantanamo concentration camp

3) We have backed various dictators, including Syria's current regime, when it suited our political purposes (see also Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Iran, Chile, Guatemala, Vietnam, Panama, etc).

4) We are selling/supplying weapons to various factions around the world, including material that can be used for chemical/biological weapons.

5) We have been doing this for over a century.

We cannot spend decades causing problems, then solve them in a six week military campaign

Syria's problems are complex and cannot be unraveled by simple air strikes and giving guns to the rebels. In fact "simple" solutions will make the problem worse, and possibly bring us back into a confrontation with Russia.

[Caretha]

270. 6) our new allies are now Al Queda

WTF?

Just shoot me.

[Snake Plissken]

59. These "Peace Extremists" have a serious prejudice against mass murder.

talk about close-minded

[DontTreadOnMe]

111. I have no problem calling out the EXTREME LEFT

They have gone so far around the curve they are joining hands with the EXTREME RIGHT.

[Maedhros]

137. You, sir, are clueless and belligerent.

"Extreme Left." Please.

[DontTreadOnMe]

161. Yes, the "Hair of Fire Extreme Left"

kind of like Abbie Hoffman running scared from "authority".

The extreme LEFT now supports:

1. anti-government rants, see Rand Raul
2. paranoid... everyone is watching you
3. calling out centrist DEMS as "war criminals" and "authoritarians"
4. not wanting to get involved with possible "war crimes", such as the use of chemical weapons on children in Syria -- while at t he same time calling keep who do want to stop the madness as "war mongers"
5. trust Snowden, without ANY ACTUAL facts (SHOW ME THE FACTS, M'AM!) - someone who is now hiding in Russia, but YOU trust him because some journalists "say" he has some evidence, but we can't show it to you right now. We might leak it slowly, you will have to wait for the evidence, but "trust me" - Obama is evil.

The extreme LEFT can't get organized under something coherent, so the rest of "left of Obama Dems" are worried that the "EXTREME LEFT" is going to hand over the next mid-term election to the Rethugs...

[Maedhros]

168. If the jackboot fits...[n/t]

[DontTreadOnMe]

182. Yes, us Moderate Left Dems wear jackboots...

Is calling DUers here "facists" against the TOS?

[fascisthunter]

238. you don't come off as moderate

but then again, extremists always belive they are "mainstream", which is what makes them so extreme.

[Caretha]

271. You are neither

moderate nor a dem

[RC]

129. Well, I guess we should be like the "Real Democrats" here and be for even more foreign wars, that

maim and kill even more innocent people.

To bad Liberals and Progressives are not "Real Democrats" around here anymore. You have to be Republican Lite to be a "Real Democrat" now-a-days.

[DontTreadOnMe]

164. No one is advocating a new war, but that is how EXTREME your position is...

you just can't recognize there are plenty of DEMS who were against the Bush War, and want out of the Middle East -- but you STILL DON'T let war crimes go unnoticed.

The use of chemical weapons on civilians is universally seen as war crimes.

Just go ahead and admit it, you want to walk away and not do anything about it, or even recognize it even happened.

[RC]

207. Seeing how we continue to play both ends against the middle in the Middle East...

And have helped both sides at one time or the other and sometimes both sides at the same time.
A flow chart of our involvement in the Middle East would make the unraveling of Gorden's knot seem like a simple granny knot. Someone, a couple of days ago posted a flow chart showing that. Hopefully someone will post it again.

If no one is advocating new war, then what is this discussion about?
So this is just a continuation of an existing war, against different a people, in a different country. Got it.
Why have there been rumors of this for a couple of decades then? It seems to be a goal of the Neo-cons, back when.

[DontTreadOnMe]

210. "what is this all about" -- taking out the capability to use chemical weapons

If we can locate them, we can destroy them or capture them.

That is NOT advocating war. There is a difference.

[RC]

211. Shooting holes in them and/or blasting off arms, legs, heads, is somehow better?

Put down the kool-aid. None of the ways of dieing in war is good or humane.

[DontTreadOnMe]

213. Obviously you are not in the military, or have any idea on tactics

There are numerous ways to make an enemies weapons (or chemicals) unusable.

Or you can sit back and do nothing. It's obvious what your choice is, the rest of the adult world is moving forward with coming up with the best solution.

The use of chemical weapons used on people ANYWHERE in the world is unacceptable. What is wrong with you?

[RC]

219. No, what the hell is wrong with you?

How about not killing them in the first place? Ever think of that? The use of war ANYWHERE in the world is unacceptable.
We stir things up, supply one or both sides with war toys and/or destabilize their government, then sit back and poke and prod till things get out of hand, then rush in, pretending to be the good guys in a mess WE created. That is what happened here. If we had behaved ourselves and stayed away in the first place, this would not be happening.

[neverforget]

248. You do know we're not going to hit the chemical weapons themselves, right?

We're going to hit the delivery systems: artillery and aircraft. Of course in order to do that, you need to take out the air defense systems if we are going to use aircraft to hit these targets. After these strikes are over, Assad is still going to possess chemical weapons.

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/08/26/20198664-us-military-options-in-syria-a-briefing?lite

The best American option would probably be to go after the mechanisms Syria uses to deploy its chemical weapons — delivery systems and command-and-control structures.
Even then, Assad knows better than to put chemical weapons stockpiles and delivery systems in the middle of nowhere. He probably has positioned them in strategically tricky places, like close to schools and towns.
That way, an enemy strike would run the risk of harming huge numbers of Syrian civilians, even children, and acts as a deterrent for enemies of the Syrian government.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2013/aug/27/syria-crisis-military-options-nick-houghton

Nobody in Washington or London is prepared to countenance "boots on the ground", and an air war against Assad's well-equipped jet fighters and anti-aircraft defences is equally unappealing. So strategists have been looking at ways of hitting a limited number of regime targets over a short period with precision missiles and laser-guided bombs.

The hope is that these attacks would deter Assad from using chemical weapons and make it more difficult for him to launch them if he wanted to.

The US is reported to be considering a two-day campaign, according to the Washington Post – a timescale that chimes with British hopes that any attacks would be seen as warning shots rather than the first steps in a broader campaign.

[Caretha]

276. No - he doesn't know

DontTreadOnMe hasn't the foggiest fuckin' clue what he's talking about. People like him make me want to slap some sense into them.

[Savannahmann]

260. Question

How long do you have to serve in the military before you have been hit in the head enough that you can't see futility right before you? As we pull out of Afghanistan, the hated enemy the Taliban is moving right back in. A few thousand lives and a few trillion dollars later and we have accomplished nothing.

On to Syria. We are opposing bad guys led by Assad. We are supporting bad guys affiliated with AQ who are sworn to destroy us. So while opposing bad guys who are backed by Iran who also supports Hamas which backs the Muslim Brotherhood which is opposed to Assad, we support and oppose bad guys backed by Iran either directly or indirectly.

Tell me again about these tactics. I think you might have them down, but strategy seems to be lacking. There is no way this ends well no matter what we do. If we weaken Assad we have a another secular state where radicalized people are in charge. If we don't weaken Assad we look impotent as a military power.

It is a lose lose situation for us. If Iran attacks Israel in retribution it is a lose lose for Isreal and Iran. So tell me how this ends well for anyone. Because I just don't see it.

[idwiyo]

275. OMG!1!! Finally!!! A post from Military Expert (tm). Woo Hoo!!1!!

[bvar22]

332. You would think they would be willing to compromise,

..and settle for just a limited amount of Collateral Damage, say 100,000 innocent women & children?
[font size=5]But NOOOOOO![/font]

They insist that the death of just one, little, innocent child is TOOOOO much,
like they would even notice!!!
They always have to have it their way.

Damned PURISTS!!!
Won't let anyone have any fun.

[winter is coming]

60. Well, at least that's one of the things I actually support, so it's something of an improvement. n/t

[Jackpine Radical]

66. I. Do. Not. Fucking. Believe. It.

"Peace purist."

Well, I guess that's me.

I tend to oppose wars where a) our national survival isn't at stake, and b) where nobody even knows what a "win" would look like. So now we're gonna blow the shit out of some innocent people in the Middle East because someone "gassed their own people?"

If Assad (assuming it was Assad) had used napalm instead of Sarin, would that have been better? It would at least have been on a moral par with what we did in Vietnam.
Syria won't "tit for tat" with strikes against Israel? What's Iran going to do? Sit idly by while their mutual-defense pact partners get blown up? They do have the capacity to do a lot of damage, not just to Israel, but to our Navy, and they may be crazy enough at the top to imagine that Allah will come to their aid.

If Iran retaliates with conventional weapons, will we nuke them? Are they willing to gamble on that? I'm afraid that the Neocon/Israeli "deep plan," which long antedates Obama's Presidency, involves nuking Teheran. That would pretty much leave Israel as King of the Hill in the Middle East--a position they have long coveted, I think.

But then I'm a "peace purist."

[LittleBlue]

69. Not sure what war perverts are doing on DU

Maybe they're lost? Go find a neocon website to pimp your war fantasies

[HooptieWagon]

83. They're pimping for the MIC.

Pushing a lauch button is so much easier than diplomacy....I guess we won't be hearing much "n-dimensional chess master" proclamations on this. It appears that Obama's red line in the sand is merely a promise to the MIC that he will defend them from red ink. I wonder how many of the Keyboard Commandos are planning to enlist?

[LittleBlue]

177. No kidding

They should enlist or their kids should enlist, they can be part of the first wave. See how enthusiastic they are then.

If this goes badly, does it go as one of those things Obama is powerless to prevent (blame congress)?

[HooptieWagon]

199. GOP will blame Obama when (not if) this goes bad.

Obama will blame progressives for not holding his feet to the fire, and then run the bus over us a few more times. :rolleyes:

[HooptieWagon]

77. Peace Purist checking in.

Thats a label I'll proudly wear. And while the prospects of engaging in another quagmire in which there is no winning scenerio are deeply troubling, I am chortling to myself imagining the mental contortions the Personality Cult must be engaging in. They're such good little germans.

[Enthusiast]

81. Allow me to be counted as a peace purist.

[99th_Monkey]

84. What do you expect?

From people who would coin phrases like "The Professional Left"
with a straight face.

[get the red out]

87. Nice to be "pure" at something

I seriously doubt the US getting involved in this conflict will improve the situation. Our nation needs to step back from assuming the position of world police force.

All the people gassed by Assad will be quickly forgotten once the US launches one bomb off course that kills civilians. Then we get to enjoy more wrath of the world.

[treestar]

89. People are always victimizing the poor progressive DUers

But do you oppose all wars, or US interventions in matters like this, no matter what?

Isn't it true that if the President decides he's not going to do anything, you will be skewering him for not caring about poor Syrians killed by gas?

[WorseBeforeBetter]

114. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, Coast Guard...

how are you contributing to these U.S. interventions? 101st Chairborne doesn't count.

[treestar]

120. As a US citizen, I consider that I contribute to all US aggressions

either its using my tax dollars or even for those who don't pay taxes due to low incomes, it's our elected government.

We seem to believe as a nation, as do other nations, that there are limits on what we will let other sovereign nations get away with without doing some type of thing to discourage it.

We learned from the Nazis and aren't going to allow such a thing to happen again without at least trying. That seems to be our country's position, and it's not a bad one.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

136. When do you assume serious risk?

Paying taxes is easy.

[treestar]

170. It's our country doing these things

and our country is not run by dictators.

Why aren't we all responsible for what our country does, good or bad?

[Maedhros]

140. 2003 called.

They need you to justify the invasion of Iraq.

[treestar]

171. what do you mean?

Because Iraq was no justified, no intervention is ever justified again, no matter what the facts?

There were no WMD in Iraq. There was not enough proof that there ever was.

But here there are people confirming the use of chemical weapons.

[NealK]

267. This war is as illegal as the Iraq war.

Such an intervention is clearly contrary to international law, in the absence of Security Council authorization. It is a reminder of the wars in Afghanistan, Iraq and so many others, when justifications were concocted and propaganda pumped out at high volume.

https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2013/08/27-2

[treestar]

301. A political disagreement over the need for a war

Does not make that war "illegal." It is better to say that you don't agree with the war than to label it "illegal."

Your quote is simply someone's opinion. They haven't even cited what "international Law" they claim is violated.

[Caretha]

278. Oh please

I bet you were defending the invasion of Iraq. You think Colin Powel providing "proof" in front of the UN isn't more powerful than the crap being thrown around as fact now was?

[treestar]

303. No, I was not.

In fact we are pointing out the difference to you.

There is proof this time and was not that time.

You are opposing intervening where there is proof of WMD, which means you would have opposed Iraq even if there had been WMD and proof of that.

[HardTimes99]

209. Um, hate to break it to you but we used napalm on Vietnam and white phosphor

Last edited Tue Aug 27, 2013, 05:47 PM - Edit history (1)

in the razing of Fallujah. We have NO MORAL STANDING to lecture anyone. NONE!!! Our former president and vice president should by all rights be in the dock at the Hague right now for war crimes.

[treestar]

310. There's a difference between those things being used then

and these chemicals being used now.

And the situations were entirely different.

It's no excuse for not doing something against using chemical weapons now, though. And is it true if we did nothing now that you would be saying we were wrong for doing nothing?

[HardTimes99]

316. Oy vey. What part of 'We have no moral standing to lecture other nations about chemical weapons'

don't you get? Or are you saying It's OK when the US does it?

[treestar]

325. So we cannot do anything about chemical weapons

because we once used non-chemical weapons. In fact we are the ones who used nuclear weapons. So forever for the rest of our existence, we are not allowed to have any say in what other nations do.

Are you sure you'd be down with that, because I'm thinking you'd be saying, if we were doing nothing, that we were wrong to do nothing and that Obama wasn't helping these poor people.

[HardTimes99]

338. Napalm is not a 'chemical weapon'? OK. I'm sure the Vietnamese girl running down

the road in that iconic photo with her skin dripping off of her like wax melting off a burning candle would beg to differ. But just keep telling yourself the U.S. doesn't use chemical weapons.

[treestar]

339. I don't think the US has gassed anyone

But then admittedly we used nuclear weapons once. So my question still stands. Are we forever to be hands off when some other country does something like this? And for no other reason than that we dropped an atomic bomb?

[Quantess]

308. Chickenhawk. (no text)

[treestar]

311. Black and white thinking.

Are we to do nothing about chemical weapons being used? And if we in fact did nothing, what would you be saying?

[Quantess]

326. That it's not our war to fight.

And if we in fact did nothing, what would you be saying?

[treestar]

327. That's a given

What would you be saying if we did nothing about chemical weapons? That we are evil for letting the Syrians be gassed?

[Quantess]

335. No.

It sounds like you are projecting your idea of how a hypocritical Obama basher would react, onto me. I do not appreciate that, thank you very much.

I would not, in fact, think that. The USA shouldn't be running all over the world punishing every wrongdoer and righting every wrong.

[ForgoTheConsequence]

156. 101st Chairborne

Nice!


It's always the people without any skin in the game who are most enthusiastic about going to war.

[WorseBeforeBetter]

165. Exactly. No skin.

Don't miss bvar's upthread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=3543396

[Warren Stupidity]

191. "Isn't it true ..." no, that would be false.

Isn't it true that if the President decides he's not going to do anything, you will be skewering him for not caring about poor Syrians killed by gas?

No. That is not true. That is just you making shit up and reframing the issue so that you can view it through your "ardent supporter of Obama" perspective in a way that avoids the unpleasant reality of what you are supporting.

[treestar]

312. Actually no, I am pointing to the ODS

I think it's pretty clear that if Obama were doing as you say you want him to do, you would be skewering him for not caring about people being killed by gas.

[Warren Stupidity]

315. You're pointing at a picture in your head that makes sense to you.

Everyone of "us" has supported Obama when he has done things we support. Most of us worked for his re-election. Your bullshit framing of us as suffering from "ODS" is dishonest crap that, as I said, makes you feel better about what it is you are doing.

[LWolf]

309. I oppose all wars.

If I want to skewer the president, I've got plenty of valid ammunition without Syria. Should he decide not to use troops in Syria, I will acknowledge that he did something right, as I have done at least twice since 2009.

[treestar]

313. That's good

If you oppose all wars, I suppose that would include the civil war going on in Syria now?

How do you act on that opposition?

[LWolf]

318. I oppose all wars.

I don't act on someone else's civil war by picking a side and joining in. That's war.

If any physical action is required to protect, to evacuate, a nation, it needs to be decided by the UN, and any involvement on any nation's part needs to be directed by them.

I act on my opposition by supporting groups and individuals promoting peace with my voice, my dollars, my votes, and, when possible, my presence. I act on my opposition by opposing warmongers with my voice, my dollars, my votes, and when possible, my presence.

As far as I'm concerned, the only people supporting war should be those who plan to wage it themselves. With their presence at those weapons, on those lines of battle. Supporting wars from a safe distance, supporting putting others at risk, while remaining safely at home, is cowardly and hypocritical, to say the least.

[treestar]

324. But you must oppose their war

As it is with no US involvement right now.

[LWolf]

341. I'm not sure

what part of "I oppose all wars" you aren't getting.

I'm also unsure of why it is so important to you whether or not I oppose any other nations' civil wars. Those wars are included in "all wars." I'm surprised that you need this to be explained. The term "all" encompasses the whole number of wars.

I oppose all wars.

I support other interventions when needed, but only through the UN. No unilateral policing of the world by the U.S..

[QC]

90. Hot off the press: Humanitarian Purist.

Yes, that is apparently supposed to be an insult.

[ZombieHorde]

91. As another DUer has said:

All we're saying is give war a chance.

[Scuba]

94. Nice alliterative ring to it.

But it should be grounds for a hide. Advocating for war should be grounds for a pizza.

[bvar22]

99. I agree.

"it should be grounds for a hide. Advocating for war should be grounds for a pizza."


Being tolerant and understanding does NOT mean I have to allow WAR & HATE Mongering.

[RC]

162. I agree.

Also notice the language the pro-war/War Purists use. either/or: always/never, all/none. No grey there, just binary thinking.
And their straw-men, such as Comparing this civil war to WWII and the Nazi gassing the Jews. This is Conservative, Republican language. What is it doing on DU?

I find this cartoon most appropriate.

[oldhippie]

96. Proud Peace Purist here ...

.. checking in with the others.

[cer7711]

100. Remember When We Blew Up Nerve Gas Stockpiles In Iraq . . .

. . . and our troops over a hundred miles away came down with a host of degenerative nerve diseases and syndromes? And it took us almost ten years to figure out what had gone wrong and why?

What do we think will happen when we send cruise missiles rocketing into nerve gas munitions stockpiled in heavily-built up areas of Syria?

Look for a similar news story (re: Syrian civilian casualties) ten years hence.

Am I missing something here?

[NRaleighLiberal]

103. happy to assume that label! another checking in!

[RC]

104. I am a "peace purists" and have proudly advertized that fact for a long, long time.

[rurallib]

118. peace purist from 1965

learned plenty from that experience

[scheming daemons]

124. *ONE* poster used that term, and should've has his OP hidden for it....

...but using that as a strawman to apply it as something that everyone who is not against action in Syria is labelling you is kind of a dick move.


ONE person said that. There's no "meme". There's no "coordinated effort".


Beat up on the asshole that used the term.... and don't stereotype it and make it look like there's a group of people doing it.



You should be better than that, MNBrewer. Some people agree with action in Syria, others disagree. Do so respectfully whichever side you're on.

[UTUSN]

343. Thanks for calling b.s. for what it is. n/t

[Jack Rabbit]

128. Joan Baez is a peace purist. I am not.

Nevertheless, I am very skeptical of wars and the noble reasons given for them. They are usually avoidable and often waged for nefarious reason. All the crap about defending freedom and protecting America didn't disguise the fact that the war against Iraq was pure and simple colonial piracy.

OK, back us up against the wall, we're going to come out fighting. From the perspective of Britain and France, World War II could not be avoided. Yet all wars are stupid wars properly considered. Der Fuhrer's twisted dreams of tall, blue-eyed blond men as a dominant race ruling the world and exterminating inferiors should have been laughed at, not followed blindly.

If I personally decide the US should not send troops or strike Syria from the air, then does that mean I want Assad to remain in power? No. I'd like the Syrian people to overthrow the bastard and if they make a lamppost ornament out of him, I'll shed no tears. I would like to see Assad supplanted with a people's government that builds roads, office buildings and affordable houses; plans for Syria in a post-fossil fuel world; and doesn't meddle in Lebanon and supports a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

As an American, I don't want to see my government engage in "nation building" largely to benefit not the American people but American artificial persons and the corporate royalists who hide behind corporate logos. Why should we even be asked to fight their imperialist wars?

America has had a very poor record in nation building endeavors. I don't think we can do for the Syrian people better than what they can do for themselves. I didn't do it for the Afghans or the Iraqis. Let's learn that lesson and not even try with Syrians or Iranians.

[Octafish]

133. Labels and Propaganda. Misinformation and Disinformation - From the Toolkit of the Ruling Class.

Thanks for the heads-up, MNBrewer. Peace must not be cool anymore.

[Savannahmann]

138. Is it me, or have more and more Democrats started moving to the right of the Tea Party?

President Obama for one. As a Community Organizer he certainly saw the travesty that is justice for the poor who can't hope to afford the finest legal council. Yet he has issued about sixteen pardons and commutations during his Presidency. That is less forgiving than anyone who held the office except William Harrison who died shortly after taking the office and didn't have a chance to pardon anyone.

The why is obvious, he is terrified of being labeled Soft on Crime like Dukakis was.

The same is true of the idea of military action. So many of us run to the cameras frothing at the mouths shouting bomb them that I can't tell the difference between our side, and the Republicans. Here on DU, the Hawks pound at their keyboards giving justifications that are as equally lame as the ones given by the Neo-Cons during the Iraq War Debate.

All I want to know is what happened to my Democratic Party? What happened to the Party that told President Ford that we would not go back into Viet Nam even though the North Vietnamese had broken the peace treaty?

On 14 January 1975, Secretary of Defense James Schlesinger testifies to Congress that the U.S. is not living up to its promise to South Vietnam's President Thieu that we would defend the South if the North attacked.

One week later, after consulting with Congress, President Ford said that there was no way we were going back into Viet-Nam.

A Democratic Congress stopped the war from our point of view, and let the Vietnamese settle their own problems. An outcome we had stalled for over ten years with so many young lives wasted on both sides.

If we had these Democrats in the Congress, not only would we have gone back in, we would have marched north until we occupied the entire nation of Viet-Nam.

What happened to that Democratic Party? What happened to the ones who realized the futility of trying to pick a winner in a civil war? Have we all forgotten the problems associated with an illegal war?

I swore months ago after getting into an argument with a DU user about Syria that I would not post about that topic. To this day, I have not violated that promise. But this is not a post about Syria, this is a question about our party and our values. We stopped standing on principle, and we stopped standing up for core beliefs. Now, we're rushing to the right so fast that my hair is being snatched out of my head by the buffeting wind.

So I'm not talking about Syria, all I want to know is what happened to my Democratic Party?

[DrDan]

306. I suppose this should not come as a surprise - who would have thought a D would put SS

on a negotiation table

[quinnox]

142. "peace purist" is freeper speak

I would not be surprised to see any duers using that language to get banned sooner or later. So it is not something to get *that* worked up about in my humble opinion.

[scheming daemons]

150. One poster used the term... and his OP should've been hidden

...

[quinnox]

154. I saw that, that is why I don't think it is such a big deal

It is not like we have the term being thrown around by many duers. One duer posted an OP that used a freeper-like term. It does not mean a DU emergency should happen.

[UTUSN]

344. May the good sense prevail. n/t

[annabanana]

143. I'll wear it. . . . n/t

[Bake]

147. I don't know if I'm a "purist" or not.

I do believe that, sadly, some wars are necessary evils. If our nation is attacked by another nation, sure, we go to war. But I don't think we need to go to war with Syria ... not now at least, for sure.

Bake

[brooklynite]

148. Well, as one of the "lackeys" and "apologists", I'd say the name calling is about even

[Ed Suspicious]

151. Proud Peace Purist right here.

[peace13]

157. A+!!!!

I'm proud to say, I've never made a dollar off of peace!

[whatchamacallit]

159. Peace Purists? DU is overrun with War Trolls! n/t

[ForgoTheConsequence]

160. I'm not a "peace purist".

I'm just smart enough to realize that doing something isn't always better than doing nothing. Sometimes we don't have what it takes to make things better. If I knew we could drop a few bombs and end all the pain and suffering in the world I would be all for it, but it doesn't work like that.


Sometimes bad people do bad things to each other, sometimes entangled alliances and obligations make for no-win situations. First and foremost we need to ask ourselves "will our involvement make things better?" and "how will this benefit us?". More often than not the answers are "no" and "it wont".

[Maedhros]

265. That's the question that needs answering: how does this make things better?

What, exactly, are we hoping to accomplish?

An end to the fighting? How did that work out in Libya?

Regime change? How did that work out in Iraq?

[blackspade]

167. I'll call them "Death's Cheerleaders".

[Warren Stupidity]

188. It is the same Authoritarian Apologists. They don't need any other label.

[MisterP]

169. they're already preparing "paper towels" for us peaceniks when we have "egg on our faces"

[Blue_In_AK]

173. Slur me all you want to.

I've been anti-war my entire life, almost 67 years. In fact, I was raised Quaker/church of the Brethren, so anti-war is in my genes. Participating in another war now is insanity.

[frylock]

175. look at the source. that asshole is a center-right douchebag.

[A Simple Game]

179. Good, now I have two things that I am not afraid to admit and am even proud of.

First that I am a liberal, maybe even of the bleeding heart variety.

Second, that I am a peace purist. I know one thing that the hawks don't. Nobody ever wins a war, nobody, never!

Now I have a badge for each shoulder.

[lunatica]

181. Being called a peace purist is kind of flattering

Being referred to as an anti-war activist doesn't quite cover the entire scope of what I believe and want.

[yawnmaster]

183. "peace purist" is a slur?!??

maybe when one calls someone a peace purist, they are required to have a mean sneer on their face, and maybe growl a bit.
Otherwise, it isn't much of a slur.

[felix_numinous]

184. Republicans are here

Or what used to be referred as Republicans. It is the only way to explain Bush backers, the homophobes, the racism, calling what used to be the Democratic Party 'party purists' --'peace purists' is just icing on the cake.

The goalposts are on the move again, and so are the RW talking points. But we haven't moved at all.

It is actually a sign of desperation, ridiculing peace, imagine feeling threatened by peace activists, sad really.

[Warren Stupidity]

187. Peace purist here! The last 61 years of my life have been spent in a state of war.

I'd like to give peace a chance.

[JI7]

190. this is amazing, to play the victim because one poster said something

on a discussion about chemical weapons being used on people and whether there should be a response to that.

but it seems like a lot of DU is about that these days.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

192. "Peace Purist"? Count me in!

I know, the White House etc are beating the drums to go to war in support of the Sunni rebels against the Shiite regime.

In Iraq, we helped the Shiites overthrow the Sunnis.

Fair and balanced?

Let's stay the fuck out of there!

[HardTimes99]

193. I call it 'neo-McCarthyism,' since its subtext is (to varying degrees) anti-semitism and

appeasement.

The DUer who first used the phrase has issued a couple specious defenses of his use of the term but has displayed a cowardly refusal to engage most of the DUers who took issue with the use of the term.

Typical of McCartyite bullies and their heirs.

[barbtries]

202. that's a slur, huh

ok, i'll be all that. i'm a liberal too, so there.

NO MORE WAR

[Iggo]

208. They're the cool regulators smoking cigaro.

[Quantess]

214. Is that what the chickenhawks say?

Who cares what the chickenhawks say.

[Laelth]

216. Then I embrace the term.

I am a peace purist (in regards to Syria), and I am not ashamed to be so labeled.

-Laelth

[Spitfire of ATJ]

217. How many here remember when the Bush Bastards claimed Saddam wasn't going alone...

They claimed he was going to pull a "Jim Jones" and all of Baghdad was going to be under a green cloud.

As proof of that, they pointed to 9/11 and the pilots flying into buildings. Thus linking the two AGAIN in their rhetoric.

[bigwillq]

220. Proud Peace Purist!!!

[sabrina 1]

221. I guess we have Right Wingers on DU. Right Wing comments like that should

be alerted on.

[BlueToTheBone]

223. I am a Peace Purist and

happy that I am.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

225. peace purist here

[AsahinaKimi]

229. Just curious where this term popped up from...

Who threw the term together? I rather like it.. Peace Purist. I would wear that badge... So would the people of Hiroshima and Nagasaki today.

[LostOne4Ever]

242. +1,000,000 (nt)

[AsahinaKimi]

244. Domo Arigatou Gozaimasu!

Heiwa shimasu! (Peace!)

[AverageJoe90]

231. There IS some truth to this, I'm afraid.....

With that said, though, I'm not so gung-ho about this, either. And certainly, I don't want any boots on the ground: if we HAVE to do this, at least let's stick to what we did in Libya......

[bluestate10]

232. I fight with the far Left often. But I oppose military action against Syria. The USA

isn't the world's top cop. Syria is a mixed up situation, one group we help today will attempt to stab us in the back during the future. I say we stay the hell out.

[lcordero2]

234. ok this is just bullshit

People know that war serves to make extremely malicious people rich at
the expense of the population (debt) and at the expense of an opposing
population (resource grab or land grab). These extremely malicious people
also fix taxes so the burden of maintaining civilization doesn't fall on them.
Somehow paying that debt must be pushed to on the lower economic classes.

People that are actually in face to face conflict are not supported. Support
for long term injuries isn't there. These extremely malicious people try to
cut at the support of people that have had long term injuries.

[fascisthunter]

235. wow... that's pretty damn goofy

[another_liberal]

240. When it's another war of choice they're talking about . . .

They can call me a "purist" if they want. Their war still sucks!

[LostOne4Ever]

243. I will proudly take that label

As well as peacenik, liberal, and pacifist.

We should strive for peace!

[kpete]

246. pure peace

[L0oniX]

247. "peace purists" pisses off the assholes ...nothing new. n/t

[madinmaryland]

251. I'm a Prairie Purist...

[BlueMTexpat]

254. Proud "Peace Purist" speaking up ...

I was proved right then. And I am right now.

And so is everyone else - of whatever political stripe - who agrees with me.

A military strike in Syria is madness and will create many more problems than it solves.

Am I the only one who remembers the story of the "Gleiwitz incident?" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident

Who would benefit most from a US military strike on Syria? Hmmm

[cantbeserious]

258. I Am A Peace Purist

eom

[TomClash]

268. Peace purist here too

And I will feel the pain of war for the rest of my life.

[oxymoron]

272. I guess I'm a peace purist as well.

May all sentient beings find peace. Namaste

[truth2power]

273. I don't care what they call me. n/t

[cry baby]

282. Not much of a slur! nt

[Skip Intro]

283. DUers LOVE labels!

Just a fact.

[DeSwiss]

286. Pure Peace is the only true type of Peace.

Anything else is just Imitation Peace.

- Some palates are too unsophisticated to know the difference.....

K&R

[tiredtoo]

289. For the record

I am already against the next war.

[Brewinblue]

293. Yay for us

for we are pure!!!

[donheld]

295. I would wear the title of Peace Purist with great honor.

Glad to be in that number.

[blkmusclmachine]

299. Sock puppets/apologists.

Too much $$$ to leave on the table to NOT start another War!!

TERRA! TERRA! TERRA!

Scared yet??

Cuz they've got a solutiion ...

[steve2470]

302. Peace Purist here, reporting for duty !

[GTurck]

314. I remain...

anti-war to the core of my being.

We have failed as a civilization if the only way we can answer a humanitarian need is with violence.

Our hypocrisy is showing because of the hundreds or thousands we have killed with our bomb and drone attacks when we weren't sure of the target.

NO MORE WAR!

[tblue]

330. I am a Peace Purist.

The arrogance of some people.

[niyad]

331. the only response to that is a puzzled, "but. . .you say that like it's a BAD thing!"

[obxhead]

334. Or we're racists.

That's the end all fall back position. If we disapprove of the policy of this administration we must be racists.

[QC]

340. You never really loved him!!

[jsr]

345. Whereas War is Pure if you have a Nobel Peace Prize