Can we all agree, that any solution that does not require military action is great?

[Logical]

Maybe Obama was clever and had this planned for 6 months.

Maybe Obama stumbled into this by accident.

Either way, if no military action is needed, it is a good thing for everyone.

Maybe we can all agree on this.

[Avalux]

1. I can do that!

It's a good thing for the entire world. One thing's for sure, if Bush was still prez, we'd have bombed by now.

[Logical]

4. True, or McCain or Romney. n-t

[Autumn]

20. Ain't that the truth. By now Bush would have bombed Syria, Iran, Russia and

to prove he's tough he probably would have bombed Iraq again. This is a good thing and a good day.

[The Link]

2. I agree with that.

[Little Star]

3. Hear, hear.

[Whisp]

5. why sure.

[Zorra]

6. I'm on board with that. nt

[AtomicKitten]

7. Yes indeed. nt

[1awake]

8. No... it's more fun to poke each other with sticks!

Just kidding... sorta. Yea, I can step back and agree with your statement. Either way... so far, no military action is a good thing.


Now we can all start arguing about the government surveillance again as we should be!

[Logical]

9. True, I miss the NSA arguments! :-)

[Spitfire of ATJ]

26. I miss the "Hillary vs Obama Primary Wars"....

People took their ball and went home.

[alfredo]

31. I miss my paisley stuffed elephant.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

38. A lot of people knocked the stuffing out of the GOP symbol during the Bush Years.

[alfredo]

58. Many were self inflicted.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

60. On many levels....

[alfredo]

61. He never caught onto the joke.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

62. Nor that "running" didn't require sneakers.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

10. Completely.

I hope the people of Syria are able to sleep a little bit better at the thought they might not be bombed to smithereens by the US. Having to worry about al-Assad and the rebels is quite enough.

Next step: a diplomatic/political solution for the civil war in Syria.

[Enrique]

11. I agree with that n/t

[joshcryer]

12. No, silly. The saber rattling must stop.

Cupcakes must be delivered.

[arcane1]

13. Hey! You are an Obama worshiper! Or an Obama hater! Or something...

Sorry, I'm having trouble adapting to this one-extreme-or-another paradigm that has taken over this place

[Logical]

14. I have been guilty of both at times. n-t

[Logical]

30. Depends on the day! n-t

[morningfog]

15. Yes. I wholeheartedly endorse any non-military option.

[Triana]

16. That's where I'm at. n/t

[sibelian]

17. That appears to depend on who's saying it.

Personally I think it's a great idea.

[NoOneMan]

18. Yep

With the exception of crippling sanctions that could starve a million people or something shitty like that

[WillyT]

19. YES !!! - K & R !!!

[NRaleighLiberal]

21. absolutely. n/t

[Snake Plissken]

22. Sure, just give them a few billion dollars in aid for the chemical weapons and get it over with

enough of the sideshow already, there are far more important issues to be dealing with, like jobs, education, health care, the economy est.

[Ocelot]

23. I wonder what it cost to move all those warships over there

Probably enough to fix a lot of problems here.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

25. Actually, it's not like they wouldn't be chugging around SOMEWHERE with full crews.

[Ocelot]

54. You don't know that

[Spitfire of ATJ]

59. Are you kidding? Ever hear of "drills"?

We are still maintaining a Cold War nuclear sub fleet and they're still playing "Hunt For Red October" type cat and mouse war games against non-existent Soviet subs.

If these ships weren't where they are they would be PRETENDING they're where they are.

That's not nearly as much of an outrage to me as the generals in taxpayer funded Lear jets going to tropical locations to "inspect a base" that is actually a taxpayer funded world class golf course.

[Spitfire of ATJ]

24. Then there's this...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023636598

[Logical]

34. So true! nt

[grahamhgreen]

27. I agree.

[gopiscrap]

28. YES!

[frylock]

29. agreed

[MinneapolisMatt]

32. Best thread I've seen around these parts in a while.

[Logical]

35. Thx! nt

[peace13]

33. Aaaa...yea but I would say that even if Mr. President hadn't rubbed my nose in the poopy tonight.

I did not need to be told to look again at the dead children. In fact I didn't need to look the first time at the horror there. Does more killing change the dead babies? Does my watching his video justify him killing again. The answer my friend is no!

[DrewFlorida]

36. No I don't agree that ANY solution which does not require military action is great.

However, any solution which does not require military action and removes, destroys chemical weapons stock pile is great.

If we don't eliminate Syria's stock pile of chemical weapons, they can continue to be used, or they can fall into the hands or rebels, and or possibly Al Qeda. If Al Qeda or other enemies of the United States should get hold of the stock pile, they could end up being used against Israel, or other allies of the U.S, then we would be sorry we didn't use the military option when we knew where the stock pile was located.

[abelenkpe]

37. Works for me. Nt

[ZombieHorde]

39. I know that I am very happy that the US now seems to

be taking the path of peace. I am glad that President Obama appears to be listening to us.

[DeSwiss]

40. HOW TO SUCCEED IN FOREIGN AFFAIRS WITHOUT REALLY TRYING

Obama, Kerry Are Idiot Savants Of Foreign Policy As Syria Agrees To Surrender Chemical Weapons Like Soonish


WONKETTE
2:15 pm September 10, 2013
by Alex Ruthrauff


[font size=1]Secretary of State John Kerry emerges from peace talks with
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.[/font]*

"Goodnight, dear."The story so far: Barack Obama said: “I am terrible at foreign policy, therefore I will say a bunch of stuff I only half-mean, such as that there’s a red line, and that I’m going to bomb everybody, but it will be obvious I don’t want to, and everyone will think I’m a moron.”

Then John Kerry said: “I am even worse at foreign policy than the president and I can say definitively that what is about to happen will never happen.” (KERRY: “[Assad] could turn over every single bit of his chemical weapons to the international community in the next week … He isn’t about to do it, and it can’t be done, obviously.”)

Then — HUH!? — Syria said: “Here, actually you can have all our chemical weapons that we did not use and would never use, we are pretty good at murdering people without them after all.”

Then Russia said: “We are relevant again!”

Then John McCain said: “I would still like to bomb somebody, please.”

READ MORE »


[font size=1]* - DeSwiss' Poetic License # 1234567[/font]

- You know what the best part for me is? It's that I couldn't give a rat's ass who gets credit here. The eleventy-dimensional chess player. The iron-jawed SOS with a bad memory of what a war is. The mutant killer-dictator -- son of a mutant killer-dictator who is just like good ol' dad. The KGB agent who done good and became President of Valhalla. Not even John ''Bomb, Bomb, Bomb, Iran'' McCain. It doesn't matter in the slightest. I'm just glad we won't be killing babies in Syria anytime soon.

So that just leaves the babies in Afghanistan, Yemen, Pakistan and of course, the US to worry about......

K&R

[Dragonfli]

51. And we agree yet again...that just keeps happening.

[delrem]

41. The US shouldn't back the Saudi fronted "rebel" mercenaries.

I don't swallow the kool-aid that says the US "Friends of Syria" front didn't create, fund, and arm these forces and that it isn't continuing to ramp up that "civil war".

The picture that Pres. Obama's drew of Syria and the ME was cartoonish. It contained contradictions, and asserted his right, as President, to initiate open war against a country that in his own words is not a threat to the USA. That statement was extreme and will calculated and will have consequences that belie Pres. Obama's stated goals.

[azurnoir]

42. I can, albeit it seems we're still backing AQ

over the guy who did our dirty work for us

[delrem]

43. Let me get this straight.

The US is backing AQ, over the guy who tortured members of AQ for the US?

It makes me woozy because it's *true*!

[azurnoir]

44. well there you have it

however our other ME torturer is gone too that would be Mubarak now we're after Assad

[delrem]

45. It must be nice to be SuperPower(tm) and not have to care about pesky contradictions.

When it came to the crunch, I don't think many americans would give up their super-power super-moral super-police persona. Any american can look at that super-status and say "yes, that is *me*", a favored one, a decider.

They'll enjoy thin tales spun out of a spider's gossamer, forgetting them and all the past in their enthusiasm for tomorrow's triumphs, tomorrow's virtuousness when they can bask in the a warm glow of righteousness.

[Andy823]

46. Yes, of course. nt

[hughee99]

47. Will we actually get a "solution", though, or will those in power just declare victory

and move on without solving anything?

I'm still unclear about what we're intending to "solve".

Do we we want to make sure Assad can't use chemical weapons again? IF he's cooperative and IF he's honest, he could give up his current stockpile, and that should achieve this for a little while. He'll have to kill people with conventional weapons instead, at least for a little while.

Do we want to deter others from using chemical weapons (which was the argument being made during the discussions for military intervention)? I don't think negotiating for the removal of his remaining stockpile really achieves this.

My fear is that the only problem the politicians are really looking to solve is how to get Syria off the front page.

I do agree that avoiding military intervention is good, though, because I don't see how this solves either issue.

[dimbear]

48. I predict Obama and Putin share the Nobel Peace Prize. Then truly the world will have seen

everything.

[leftstreet]

49. Yes

[Dragonfli]

50. That's all I care about, the avoidance of more war, of more blood on OUR hands

the avoidance of More children killed by OUR chemicals in Syria like they have been killed in Fallujah - adding gasoline to a raging fire only sears more souls to the core. One cannot quench the thirst for peace by gorging vengeance with yet more blood. It is always the innocents caught between raging warriors that kill for power, vengeance, "face", or profit, always the children and families just trying to survive and love and grow that pay the most in pain, loss and death. Hawks do not save children, they execute them - in the end it matters little to the dead what "noble intentions" launch the weapons of destruction that consume their bodies, in the end all they know is suffering, mourning and death.

Let the hawks pretend they were dove's all along, let them stroke their "egos" with that absurdity rather than stroke them with blood.

We did not avoid the death carnival of choice that was Iraq quite so easily, if all it took to avoid all those people dying was to stroke Bush's ego with claims of his brilliance by his sycophants and the reluctant silence of myself concerning his lack of cloth's - I could have spent my wife's last two years of life simply loving and being loved by her rather than spending it with the two of us opposing an absurd war that our conscience demanded we oppose and hopefully stop.

Perhaps another couple will have a chance at a few more months of love together now, without the horrors of war driving them to waste that time trying to stop mad men from killing.

What matters the most is we have avoided some bloodshed, at least for now. I don't care that the Hawks dance and spin and dress as doves and even take credit for a course they did not argue for, I will hold my tongue and allow them to admire the nonexistent cloths "judiciously as they will" while the emperor creates yet another reality for them to admire as only they can.

Spin is meaningless, the lives spared are not. All we can do is loudly decry the hawks when they squeal again as the surely will, the voices of many that opposed the hawks was part of this chance at peace.

When they seek peaceful political solutions, no matter the reason, I will not argue with them. I will let them pretend whatever they need to if it serves MY agenda.... Peace.

[Logical]

53. I see your point! nt

[veness]

52. We agree! No more war! K & R. n/t

[Donald Ian Rankin]

55. Absolutely not. It's better than the alternative, but still utterly appalling.

Syria will remain a war zone for the forseeable future, with or without US intervention.

[Logical]

57. I hope not! n-t

[dionysus]

56. sure, mark me down.

[Logical]

63. I will! nt