= new reply since forum marked as read
I will not vote for anybody who votes for a military solution to Syria.
You see, both sides were dead serious. Those for a strike. And those against it. It just happens that those against it outnumber those for it by 100:1 or so. So we forced those who were serious about attacking Syria to find a way out. 
That's all in your head, and you own it.
of course. But some people have referred to it as disarming.
And of course, it hasn't actually happened yet. But at least we forced it on the table. The PNACers must be having crying fits by now. 
Cameron's embarrassment in parliament was part of the 11d chess moves. I don't know why Obama would want to embarrass Cameron, it will surely be apparent within the next 5 years. 
I would assume Obama did. Unless of course you believe such a public defeat constitutes a move in a chess game. 
along with replying to polls with similar numbers.
And I have no idea what ODS means.
But I do remember Obama stating the he needs us (we the people) to *make* him do whatever.
My assertion is that we the people who wrote to congress and who answered polls made him slow down and made him come up with a political solution. I don't know whether Kerry's "off the cuff" remark was honestly off the cuff or a deliberate trial balloon. But I find it hard to believe it was part of 11th dimensional chess and in the works from the beginning.
Some are claiming this as some kind of eleven dimensional, perfectly-executed, Rube Goldberg foreign policy maneuver, and that claim just doesn't match up with reality at almost any point in the chain.
is the only thing left as discussion? How typical.
Who cares what "client" Russia keeps? The U.S. still has hundreds of bases and other attachments around the world. "Pax Americana" and all that. THAT is the "big picture" and heaping the ills of the world on one man because of your frustration with the ebb and flow of world politics that have gone on for thousands and thousands of years, is just silly.
"But Russia keeps their client, and access to Tartus Naval Base
We get to maybe disarm Assad and access to Haifa. Maybe has to do with an active war. "
...basically admit that this was Russia's way of saving Assad's ass (in order to keep its "client" and "naval base."
The fact that the world now knows definitely that Assad has a chemical arsenal, which he has already used in an attack, and he has committed to disarming is not a good position for Assad. Sure he buys time, but there is still a lot to work through.
Bottom line, Assad has to do the right thing.
I think Ian Reifowitz at Kos covered it all! thanks ProSense
EarlG got it on 9/11..
http://betterment.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1017&pid=144684
They also "saved" the expiration of the Bush Tax Cuts that they said, with absolute certainty, would never happen.
At least!
Last I saw, polls were not of DU members only. Nor were the congresspeople who said calls and emails were flooding in 100:1 against reporting only those received by DUers.
to your sad attempt to rewrite the op.
and the world did. But hair-on-fire-DUers insisted that Obama was Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld and that "Shock and Awe" was going to happen regardless because no one in his administration had any clue about the geopolitics of the area and how to get around the U.N. Security Council blockage and kickstart (with the "Big Stick" talk) the Geneva talks that have been going on for year. I.e., too many DUers keep overly focusing on immediate short-term and refuse to look at the long term.
From this link (from 2012), one might discern what may have transpired as part of a compromise leading Russia to suddenly come on board (e.g., promise of no U.S.-lead "regime change" -
This may lead to negotiating to have elections at some point - but that is probably down the road while the nation is actively engaged in the civil war (the 1st step would need to be an agreed-upon cease fire and then go from there).
about the DUers who think that only they have the solutions and the administration knows nothing?
The DU CHC are the best advisors a President can have!
I said that the people who wrote to their representatives at 100:1 against a military strike, along with the people who took the time to answer polls with similar proportions.
But go ahead and keep smokin' whatever.
but apparently that's not good enough geebus 
you'll feel better, bye and bye. I think even with the british backing us, we would have just had more muscle to force the settlement we got. You can't be sure that we would have attacked anyway. THAT IS YOUR fevered speculation and that's all. It worked, we DID NOT attack. That say anything to you? And I wouldn't buy a bridge from you, couldn't trust it to hold any weight.
it's not as though I linked a source into the OP.
meh.
fadedrose. And, I would hope the script is written by those who know what actually happened and not somebody making it up what they think it went down.
Good grief! Why didn't someone tell me sooner?
