Check in if you are a Peace Purist.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

To be honest, I support arming the Syrian Rebels, and yes it may not go as the West wants.

I don't support the US bombing another country, unless attacked first, or introducing US troops into the Syria theater.


Haven't we had enough of that?

[bowens43]

1. Checking in. 100% opposed to US involvment.

[Scuba]

30. +1

[leftstreet]

2. If it irritates the Capitalist Utopians, yes

Count me in

[cali]

3. I'll take that sobriquet though it's not 100% accurate

[AtomicKitten]

4. ((raises hand))

[eissa]

5. Present. And I do NOT support arming terrorists.

And that is exactly what they are, make no mistake about it. The Syrian anti-government activists here in the states -- while I appreciate their idealism -- are the Ahmad Chalabis of this war. Westernized ideologues who are so far removed from what is actually happening on the ground in the country most left years ago, and have zero influence.

This is a clusterfuck of epic proportions. Leaving Assad at the helm is the least of our problems.

[sabrina 1]

57. I agree re arming terrorists. But am a Proud Purist, except if this country is

in imminent danger of attack. That is the ONLY reason for even thinking about war, when we are directly threatened.

[City Lights]

6. Checking in!

[Safetykitten]

7. Me. I am a PP.

[cthulu2016]

8. A peace purist would not support arming the Syrian Rebels

[GoCubsGo]

13. Yep.

Especially when we really don't know shit about these rebels. A lot of them appear to be extremists, who may prove to be as bad or worse than the current regime. And, from what I have gathered, the "rebels" are not a monolithic group. Lots of different factions. I really hope President Obama finds a way to keep us out of that mess.

[bravenak]

9. Hi!

War sucks. No arming rebels as they may be affiliated with al Qaeda.

[JoePhilly]

10. A meta thread about a meta thread!!

Too funny.

[Glitterati]

11. Raises hand

Food not bombs.

[The Second Stone]

12. I'm not a peace purist, but the proposed adventure in Syria

is more ill-conceived than the madness in Iraq. We cannot enter the civil war in Syria without huge blowback and the other side is just as bad as Assad. Another plan needs to be arrived at, one that does not involve the US going to war.

[Erose999]

14. They can shove the war up their ass sideways. Obama, the neocons, the MIC, the whole lot of 'em. We

are fixing roads, fixing bridges and providing free healthcare to half the Middle East as it is, while our own roads and bridges crumble and our people starve and die from preventable illnesses.

[forestpath]

16. +1000000

[leftstreet]

19. +1

[AnotherDreamWeaver]

27. Sounds good to me...

[woo me with science]

47. [phone]

[Egalitarian Thug]

59. Can't argue with any of that. +1

[PowerToThePeople]

60. + another purist, checking in.

[scheming daemons]

15. Wow... one whole person used the term "Peace Purist" and you guys take this as a full blown meme?

Victim much?


One dick used an inappropriate term. Don't be just as big a dick and associate that with anyone who disagrees with you.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

21. Epithets against the left are a booming business right now. Dontchaknow?

Victim? No.

If my use of the word in the OP bothers you then perhaps it is best ignored.

[Zorra]

23. It's always best to try to stop infections before they get a chance to spread.

An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

[kenny blankenship]

17. I am no pacifist; but I oppose stupid wars and MOST WARS ARE STUPID.

Wars almost never turn out the way the war plotters hoped they would. Getting embroiled in Syria's civil war would make the invasion of Iraq look like a stroke of genius.

[Javaman]

18. I'm a pacifist and have been for 40 years. does that count? nt

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

22. If the shoe fits and is comfortable. Sure.

Whatever epithets are thrown at the Democratic left just roll off our backs, but what is truly comical is that when we use them against those who originated or approve the failed insult they get absolutely hysterical.

[Redneck_Dem]

25. Yes, VERY comical

ONE dude says 'peace purists' and now OPs about being one are popping up like mushrooms.
You sure showed him. LOL!

[Javaman]

62. um, okay then...

I see this poster was bounced as a troll.

no surprise after in another post he was against people having a living wage.

[OutNow]

20. Yeah because arming the rebels fighting the Russians in Afganistan worked out so well

I am against any war moves by Washington against Syria. Our country has a short memory when it comes to arming rebels doesn't it? Remember Osama Bin Ladin?

After years and decades of death and destruction and billions/trillions wasted in Iraq and Afghanistan some want to repeat the process in Syria. Insane.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

26. The best way of avenging thyself is not to become like the wrong-doer. Marcus Aurelius Antoninus

[bigwillq]

28. Peace Purist!

[Harmony Blue]

29. I can gladly proclaim I am a peace purist

[NuclearDem]

31. I'm here.

[zappaman]

32. First time I've heard the phrase.

What's it mean exactly?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

38. It seems to be another epithet that the trolls pretendng to be Democrats

want to throw at the left to discredit them.

[Brigid]

33. Brigid checking in.

[AsahinaKimi]

34. Yes Indeed..

I stand with all people who believe in Peace...including the people from

Hiroshima and Nagasaki Japan.

[Harmony Blue]

36. +1 That is a beautiful memorial

it invokes peace and harmony Like two hands coming together.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

39. Good for all of you. + 1000!

[Boom Sound 416]

35. Which rebels?

That country is a mess

[Th1onein]

37. Raising my hand: PROUD TO BE A PEACE PURIST!

[Bonobo]

40. War is shit at all times and can have no positive effect. I am a PP.

Some folks are born made to wave the flag
Ooh, they're red, white and blue
And when the band plays "Hail to the chief"
Ooh, they point the cannon at you, Lord
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no senator's son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no

Yeah!
Some folks are born silver spoon in hand
Lord, don't they help themselves, oh
But when the taxman comes to the door
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yes

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no millionaire's son, no
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, no

Some folks inherit star spangled eyes
Ooh, they send you down to war, Lord
And when you ask them, "How much should we give?"
Ooh, they only answer More! more! more! yoh

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no military son, son
It ain't me, it ain't me; I ain't no fortunate one, one

It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate one, no no no
It ain't me, it ain't me, I ain't no fortunate son, no no no

[Myrina]

41. Peace Purist here -- I don't support our involvement in any way.

Some things are simply none of our damn business.
Haven't we learned from a hundred years' of trying to run the world by installing tin-pot dictators and bombing the shit out of people we "disagree" with?

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

44. A very valid point.

And to answer you and all the other posters in this thread I don't want to see Assad stay in power any longer, but I also do not want to help Al Quaida-like anti-Western rebels win the day and create another state mired in theocracy.

Most if not all of the Mid East problems of today are directly related to the interference by West.


My only hope is that some rebel group will come forward that is not batshit crazy and take control of Syria for the good of the Syrians.

[1awake]

42. I think I would be labeled a war monger by a true peace purist,

and I do NOT support military action against Syria. Is there a temp PP label I can use... maybe a sticker??

[HardTimes99]

43. I consider myself a 'nattering nabob of negativism' and not a 'peace purist' but

definitely opposed to bombing Syria.

Some wars (the U.S. Civil War and World War II) had to be fought, in my opinion, hence my rejection of 'peace purist' label.

[LostOne4Ever]

45. Is it possible to be a militant pacifist?

Private Lost of the pacifist peace purist purist platoon reporting for duty.




NOTE: irony of using military terms is intended

[Egalitarian Thug]

46. Here. If we were genuinely working to stabilize the ME, we would be in Saudi Arabia. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

48. Are you looking to incite a holy war?

[Egalitarian Thug]

49. A holy war has been going on for quite some time, and we made it all possible. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

50. Do you know where Mecca and Medina are located?

You can't be serious.

[Egalitarian Thug]

51. Yes. You can quit crapping your pants, nothing's going to be done. I'm pointing out that the ME

couldn't have become the unprecedented clusterfuck it is today without our policies and our henchmen, the most significant of which is the Royal Family.

But you know as well as I do that, sooner or later something's going to break big and the whole thing is going to explode, and it is almost entirely our fault. Europe gave birth to this monster, but the U.S. gave it a chainsaw and turned it lose on the flock.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

53. Perhaps you equate general wisdom with crapping one's self?

You are definitely right when you write "nothing's going to be done."

To do something so egregious as to insert ourselves into another hornets nest, which would spike oil prices and shut down economies the world over...namely the USA's, is nothing less that colonial adventurism: something that you deride Europe for being part of.

Also the continued existence of these countries including military support, Israel as well, is a result of the cold war and the West's need for allies to counter the Soviet sphere of influence. One could argue that the West still does not trust Russia or China enough for a drawdown in that region.

I agree that any monarchy, absolute or other, is a complete waste of time, but that doesn't mean a Democratic/Socialist/Authoritarian non-monarchical Saudi Arabia would be any better in terms of what it considers its sphere of influence.

[Egalitarian Thug]

58. We made the mess. It had nothing to do with the cold war, it was adventurism, though it

was for plundering resources that other people happened to live on, rather than colonizing. Why colonize a place when you can simply steal what you want from it? We did it for Shell and Standard and Texaco and Enco. We made the house of Saud and we keep them in power, and they in turn clear the way and run interference.

We broke it and are still trying to blame it on anyone else while keeping the plundering going as fast as possible.

One of the very rare truths allowed into popular media was this scene from Syriana:
"Twenty years ago you had the highest Gross National Product in the world, now you're tied with Albania. Your second largest export is secondhand goods, closely followed by dates which you're losing five cents a pound on... You know what the business community thinks of you? They think that a hundred years ago you were living in tents out here in the desert chopping each other's heads off and that's where you'll be in another hundred years, so, yes, on behalf of my firm I accept your money." - From the film Syriana

[BlueToTheBone]

52. As a peace purist

I don't want to see any escalation with our involvement. The more we do, the worse the situation.

[avebury]

54. Checking In!

Interfering with other countries has worked so well for us in the past.

We helped to overthrow an elected government in Iran to re-install the Shah.

In helping Afghan against the Russians we hooked up with Bin Laden.

We help provide Saddam with his arsenal to take on Iran (resulting in chemical warfare on Iran, the Kurds, and his own people. Then we help the Iraqis to try him for crimes against the Kurds and his own people. Heck we proverbially gave him the match that lit the fuse.

We were in bed with Panama's Noreiga before we turned on him.

We helped Pinochet overthrow Pinochet who installed a military dictatorship. There were people (including an American) who were tortured and killed in the stadium.

Truman turned his back on Ho Chi Minh's request for assistance in establishing an independent Viet Nam, instead he sided with the French. Had we assisted the Vietnamese's independence efforts, the Viet Nam war might never have taken place.

I could go on and on. Our international track record post WWII is not much to crow about.

[LWolf]

55. Proud Peace Purist.

That would make a good DU handle.

[Shankapotomus]

56. I'm for not getting involved

militarily. If getting involved means helping refuges flee and providing medical aid I am for it. I would also back some non-violent way of seizing weapons (whether chemical or otherwise) from both sides if such a possibility ever presented itself.

But interfering militarily? No. We can't help by creating more destruction ourselves and there is no one we can support in this conflict that we would want to have in power afterword.

All we should do, at the most, is provide medical and refugee assistance to displaced and injured civilians only with the explicit understanding that we support neither sides aggressive solution. And combatants can only receive aid and/or refuge if they are no longer participating in combat.

[B Calm]

61. US Navy vet 1969-73 checking in!

[sarisataka]

63. I do not know if I am a peace purist

as I believe war is sometime a necessary evil but I like to consider the thoughts of a couple of experts on whether war is needed

"no one starts a war-or rather, no one in his senses ought to do so-without first being clear in his mind what he intends to achieve by that war and how he intends to conduct it."
- Karl von Clausewitz

For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill.
****
There has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefited.
Sun Tzu

[JHB]

64. I can't say that the term fits me, but...

...I do have to say that phrase is idiotic and is just suffused with the very myopia it purports to complain about.