Waking up to no war.

[WilliamPitt]

I know we're all having a grand old time slagging each other around here, but it occurred to me this morning that one week ago day, I was dead-bang positive we'd be at war in Syria at some point this week.

It didn't happen.

The manner in which it didn't happen has, of course, been the subject of much yelling, stomping, name-calling and finger-pointing here in the bucolic splendor of GD. Par for the course, I guess.

We can all get back to that in a few minutes, but take a moment and enjoy the fact of it.

We are not at war in Syria. We may yet (though this new deal this morning is promising), but not yet, and not today.

And that is good.



We now return to your regularly scheduled nonsense in 3...2...1...

[KG]

1. Because Obama!

[WilliamPitt]

2. Right on time.

[NYC_SKP]

100. I LOLed.

"Because Obama"

[Junkdrawer]

3. I like peace...

[orpupilofnature57]

4. Imagine if ShrubCo was president during the Cuban missile crisis ?

He's not perfect and he sure pisses me off, but I have no regrets pulling the chad twice for this guy .

[Scootaloo]

6. Bush during the missile crisis?

Last edited Sat Sep 14, 2013, 09:04 PM - Edit history (1)

He would have bombed Yucatan.

[Jackpine Radical]

20. Great line.

I salute you.

[MH1]

50. LOL, exactly. Whadyall think, DUzy?

(I've never DUzy'd anything before, btw. At least not that I can recall.)

[vlakitti]

75. YAY!

Funny truly bizarre comment. Also a perceptive comment.

[Hekate]

76. DUzy

Yes, I think Shrub would have done that. Cheney would have pushed the button for him.

[Vanje]

80. Hahaahhaa!

[Rhiannon12866]

82. +1000!

[BainsBane]

5. No war?

How do you figure that? Has peace suddenly descended on Syria? Are people suddenly not dying because the US isn't intervening? Or is it that they simply don't count because they aren't American? What has happened is that a deal has been struck to avoid US intervention. The war in Syria continues.

[WilliamPitt]

7. "We are not at war in Syria."

Plain English.

[ronnie624]

45. Not to mention the Grand Strategy of controlling key resources,

which is the catalyst for the turmoil, in the first place.

But as long as we Americans are cozy and secure, there's nothing to worry about.

[Why Syzygy]

70. I'm a lot cozier

than on March 19, 2011, when my heart was breaking. The Libyans we "rescued"? Nice and cozy in their graves.


http://news.antiwar.com/2013/09/13/us-retreats-un-syria-resolution-wont-include-military-option/

"Russian officials have been adamant about not including anything that could even tangentially refer to military action in the UN resolutions on Syria, noting that a Libya resolution authorizing a no-fly zone was immediately spun by the US as authorization for an all-out war of regime change, and fearing that Syria would be a repeat.

The US, more than any other nation, exemplifies the slow nature of the process of disarmament, as the Nixon Administration began a process of unilateral disarmament by dumping weapons wholesale in the ocean, and 45 years later the US still retains such weapons, and isn’t expected to be done disposing of them for another decade."

[BainsBane]

11. Indeed, and that is a very good thing. But that is not what the title of your OP says.

It says "no war." The two are not the same.

[RetroLounge]

67. "We are not at war in Syria."

Read the entire post next time

RL

[BainsBane]

104. I read the post

and lots of others that talk about peace. What is all the discussion about pro-war and anti-war and peace vs. war if not a complete inability to think about anything but the US?

[Spitfire of ATJ]

107. A summary from Carlin on the 20th Century....

It's the 21st Century.

Yeah,...we're gonna solve all of this with more violence.

[Why Syzygy]

71. Your contribution..

thanks for your participation. You've really opened my eyes.

[BainsBane]

105. If you don't want to consider

foreign relations or the world from any perspective other than that of the US, nothing I can say will change that.

[Why Syzygy]

116. I was replying

to your persistent pounding on the OP. THAT.

[Ghost Dog]

109. ... Because US MIC policy establishment received a credible threat of effective retaliation,

and are therefore not now at war with Russia (& China...)?

[center]
--> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-09-14/guest-post-7-choices-left-military-industrial-complex <--[/center]

[KharmaTrain]

8. America From An "Exceptional" Point Of View...

...every news event is filtered through the "how does it affect the U.S." by blogs and the media. Of course there's no peace in Syria and the situation doesn't look like it'll be resolved without even more senseless deaths, however, they won't be U.S. deaths, so all is good. Maybe the sabre rattling did get Russia off the dime to put pressure on Assad to negotiate a truce with his opponents but only time will tell...and again, since there is no U.S. involvement it's outta sight, outta mind...

[BainsBane]

12. I guess that's my point

You expressed it better than I could.

[KharmaTrain]

14. I Kinda Think...

...that this was the right message but the wrong messenger. Putin has plenty of dirt and blood on his hands and IMO his criticisms run hallow in light of his support for the Assads over the decades.

I've long been critical of our corporate media as they frame every issue in that U.S. filter so it becomes the default in any news coverage. I've always cringed at the "exceptional" term as it sounds inclusive...the opposite of what this country is supposed to be.

Cheers...

[Bake]

69. There will NEVER be a time when there is no war anywhere on this planet.

So I think waking up to the US not shooting off missiles at Syria is a good thing. It sure beats the hell out of the alternative.

Some people are never happy.

Bake

[BainsBane]

106. at least be honest about it

rather than pretending there is some sort of peace. It's like holding a giant sign up that says the only lives that matter are American. So many people adopted some bizarre cognitive dissonance as if there were a choice between war and peace. Peace was never an option. The only choice was whether or not the US would intervene. Why exactly is there to be happy about Assad killing a hundred thousand people? Or you're just not going to think about it because those people don't matter?

I don't like lies. The whole argument about peace and avoiding war is an exercise in myopic self-deception.

[Bake]

122. Then you should plan to be miserable your entire life.

Especially if you plan to worry about every life on the planet. Because there will ALWAYS be wars somewhere in the world.

I'm just glad we didn't choose to intervene this time.

Bake

[Fla Dem]

34. Our intervention worked out so well in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I hate the thoughts of the war in Syria, innocents being killed, wounded and maimed everyday. Millions fleeing their home for dirty, crowded refugee centers in Turkey. I hate war, hate war hate war. Our active military involvement in the Syrian "Civil War" will do nothing to bring peace to the region. As we have seen in Iraq, the killings and sectarian attacks continue after 9 years of American involvement. Russia is key to this conflict not the US.

[BainsBane]

48. That is in all likelihood true

My point is that this is not a contest between war and peace. It is about US involvement alone. I see a strange myopia that seems to render many unable to consider anything that doesn't involve the United States.

[jessie04]

10. "Hell no !"

A week ago some people were calling our president a bloodthirsty warmonger.

And yet they knew NOTHING of everything he was doing to prevent war....as always.

AND you leave off why we are not at war today.

You can public ally thank your president.

[BumRushDaShow]

15. ^^^THIS^^^ nt

[jessie04]

16. All I would like is the OP to acknowledge WHY we are not "at war" ?

hint...BO

[WilliamPitt]

24. Body odor?

A new diplomatic weapon?



*fleeing*

[jessie04]

53. Ahhh... so clever you.

Lets try again.....Why aren't we at war?

inquiring minds want to know. Want to give kudos to ...oh.... your president??

[bigtree]

56. you must mean 'why aren't we doing what Obama originally set out to do?'

. . . or, why hadn't their diplomatic efforts toward Syria actually been 'exhausted', as our UN ambassador claimed before the world?

[WilliamPitt]

57. Definitely.

They fumbled the football on the 5-yard-line, recovered it, and ran it in for the score.

Prior failures are no prediction of future success. Rough start, superior recovery.

[jessie04]

62. That wasn't so hard, was it.

If I could , I would nominate you for the BOG.

[WilliamPitt]

64. Nothing new here

I give him and his people great credit for hitting the brakes on the attack plan with the alacrity they did. They screwed up the front end of this thing to an awesome degree, but got it right on the back end. Moreover, they had the wherewithal to recognize the essential wisdom of The First Law Of Holes: when you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. Plenty of the presidents in my lifetime alone would have kept digging until they were buried.

Now? The UN is involved, Congress is on hold, Syria has agreed to declare its weapons, and a lot of people who might have been dead already will see the sunrise tomorrow because the Tomahawks are still in their silos.

(snip)

Frankly, it doesn't matter; the speech is far less important than the ongoing dialogue and diplomacy that is keeping people alive while avoiding a region-wide conflagration. Mr. Obama could have stepped to the podium and read The Great Gatsby like Andy Kaufman for all I care. The proof is in the pudding, and the pudding does not smell like rocket fuel, so we're all ahead on points.

All told, it's a hell of a thing to encompass on the anniversary of September 11. I, along with many others, argued that Osama bin Laden won his war the minute he compelled the Bush administration to go militarily berserk abroad while shredding the Constitution at home. Twelve years later, the Constitution is in worse shape than it has been since the Civil War, as evidenced by the ongoing NSA scandal. But maybe, just maybe, the manner in which this Syria debacle has unspooled offers a glimmer of hope that we are finally, finally crawling out from under that long, dark shadow.

After all, Mr. Obama didn't just flip some missiles the way his predecessors have. He actually went to Congress for approval of what he has described as a very small military engagement, a virtually unprecedented Constitutionally-appropriate move that took the legs out from under the Unitary Executive Theory we've been enduring for so long....and when Congress appeared poised to slap him down, along with a tremendous plurality of the American people, he backed off, looked around, and began working to find another way. Nothing is certain, and this whole thing may go sideways at any moment, but it is a refreshing change of pace to see diplomacy at work after so many years of bomb first and ask questions later.

http://www.truth-out.org/opinion/item/18745-the-long-lesson-and-new-legacy-of-september-11

^^^ from Wednesday ^^^

[Summer Hathaway]

103. There was no fumble.

But you have to hold onto that idea.

To say otherwise is to admit that you were the one who fumbled. And we both know that's never going to happen.

[DisgustipatedinCA]

110. The rest of the world knows he fumbled. Is reported every day--and I'm not talking Op-Ed

Do you have special knowledge that no one else possesses?

[frylock]

59. british parliament?

I know acknowledging Cameron's beatdown effects the Ocean's 11-dimensional chess narrative, which is why it's being largely ignored by you guys.

[Skittles]

91. THANK YOU

although I HAVE seen a couple of ridiculous theories

[progressoid]

101. Not to mention public disapproval by 70% of America and even more of the rest of the world.

[Raksha]

81. NO!!! Obama gets ZERO credibility from me ever again.

No benefit of the doubt; guilty until proven innocent.

He grabbed the life preserver that Putin threw him and that's all. What other options did he have?

[Why Syzygy]

72. We won't know for sure..

until he leaves office and writes his book. But I hope you're right.

[leftstreet]

13. Military contractors take a collective cold shower

No Democracy Missiles flying today

[99th_Monkey]

77. +10 good one. ~nt~

[toby jo]

17. Thanks, William Pitt. I've often thought how nice it would be to wake up in a Scandanavian country

where 'no war' is a constant.

Imagine the healthy thought context that reality creates on a day to day basis. Would be nice.

Obama kept us out of the middle east during the Arab spring, I thank him for that. Did not like his response to Syria, but at least he hasn't overridden anything.

[randome]

18. Pubic hair!

Sorry, I don't know what came over me.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]I'm always right. When I'm wrong I admit it.
So then I'm right about being wrong.[/center][/font][hr]

[Botany]

19. Not a bad thing

[HappyMe]

21. I'm very glad.

I hope this agreement holds.

I kind of figured that there was plenty going on behind closed doors and that the President wasn't eager to start dropping bombs.

[Autumn]

22. It is a beautiful day, we are not at war and the sun is shining in Colorado

this morning. All is right in my universe.

[Zorra]

23. + 1 nt

[cigsandcoffee]

25. I didn't and don't want war. But it doesn't make sense to "reward" Assad for using chemical weapons

If this international agreement firms him up as the leader of Syria, keeping him in power where he might have otherwise fallen, then he will have directly benefited from gassing children - and that's pretty fucked up.

[bigtree]

26. I like forestalling war. I don't care much how it's done.

But, all I can hear right now are echoes of the Bush wars in the voice of this administration.

President Obama took us to the brink of war on Syria. He threatened to unilaterally initiate that war based on a slippery interpretation of what constitutes our national security. He and his deputies in this effort took pains to repeat much of the same nonsense that characterized justifications for the Bush wars.

If Congress had agreed we'd likely be bombing them right now.

I mean, fucking, goddammit!

Fucking, goddammit!

The President's pullback to this diplomacy offered by Russia came after the utter rejection of his plans to bomb Syria; after his assertion that he could initiate strikes on his own volition. He still asserts that. Military strikes are still on the table. There's another red line a week from now.

Just, fuck!

[snappyturtle]

30. I can't get the lingering black cloud of the MIC and tptb in

PNAC out of my mind. I just don't see this volatile situation
as over....stalled, but not over. The corporate side of the
MIC and the agenda of PNAC is powerful. For right now,
the public outcry has worked giving Putin an opportunity
to score some points and the President a little space from
the red line....which will serve them well in the future if
the situation "implodes", to use Kerry's words of last week.

The vitriolic hatred among the various fighting groups in
Syria is open to setting up "errors" that will be in violation
of the resolution. And why isn't the UN meeting right now
to pass the resolution and to get the inspectors in asap
rather than six weeks from now? I guess I'm a doom and
gloomer but rest assured I would love to shed that cloak!

[bigtree]

36. and try and imagine if there hadn't been a public outpouring of dissent

. . . where would we be today; tomorrow?

I'm completely put off by the cheerleading behind every move this President has made away from his OWN autocratic intention to just pick up with Britain and bomb Syria.

What if Britain had relented?

What we're getting right now is a sort of smug attitude from the WH and supporters of his actions and intentions toward Syria that each and every move by the president was some sort of genius.

I'm just left cold and suspicious by all of the right-wing rhetoric and the autocratic echoes from the Bush wars. It's been more than clumsy; it's downright ignorant of so many lessons of the past that I wonder if this President understands at all what needs to be repudiated from that tragic experience.

The MIC still rules. The MIC still dictates. The PNAC is licking their chops after being served a dish from their own recipe book. How the hell can any self-professed progressive be comfortable with all of this?

Gobama! Oh my fucking god.

[snappyturtle]

44. I can't agree with you more than I do. I have come to the

conclusion that it is a handful of men making the decisions.
We are lucky for the stall...but that's all it is. After all, Congress
is moot and impotent as long as the President continues to
whisper he has the power to attack unilaterally against the
now muted rat-a-tat-tat of the war drums. The media is
useless.

Then I get to thinking about the stall...it may be serving the
powers that be more time to line up their ducks and negotiate
behind closed door agreements with neighboring countries
to serve the U.S. in exchange for "protection". It offers nothing
to reprieve the daily war lives of the Syrian people.

The naivete of the American public is stunning in regard to
the President and this administration and the MIC. This has
been no chess game; clumsy? "Yes" and at times, flying by the
seat of their pants...and some luck and lots of out of touch
elements. imho

The big picture? What better distraction than war to get us
away from the curtain cloaking the death of our Constitutional
rights and the faltering economy.

[Why Syzygy]

74. I like you .. nt

[BlueMTexpat]

108. Like you, I like to believe that the millions of us who called

and wrote - multiple times - expressing our outrage and disapproval of military intervention in Syria also had some effect. And yes, like you, I believe that PNAC and the MIC (in some cases one and the same) see themselves as having just lost a battle, not the war - which they most definitely want.

I will give the President all the credit he deserves for backing down from military intervention and getting behind diplomatic alternatives. I cannot see such a thing ever happening under Republicans of today. Ever. But I am also certain that Prez O got a pretty strong earful from other world leaders at the G-20 and I'll bet that their vehement - and largely unified - opposition also had some effect. Unlike some at DU, while I give the Prez all due credit, I do not believe that there was any sort of "multidimensional chess" occurring. There may have been some calculation, but there was certainly a LOT of luck and a LOT of strong and principled opposition. I believe the latter may actually have startled the Prez.

I also still see much too much influence in this Administration (not so much Obama himself, but certainly some of his close aides/appointees) from people who should by rights be in prison for war crimes themselves - or at least rooted out as the Bush II holdovers that they are. Remember how certain unnamed "officials" expressed themselves as surprised that Obama had even submitted the question to Congress. These same people were driving forces behind this anticipated war, helping immensely to ratchet up the unfortunate "red line" rhetoric, and Congressional participation was a setback to them. Thank heavens that the Prez sought this flank maneuver. Interestingly, however, submitting this question to the US Congress did not arise (and did not even seem to have been considered) until after the British had their own failure in Parliament.

I like to believe that Prez O is indeed a reluctant warrior, as at least one columnist called him, and I thank the Prez for that. But I had all too many occasions over the past several weeks where that belief was sincerely in doubt, if for no reason other than the rhetoric that echoed Bush II (indeed both Bushes, for that matter) against Iraq.

Until the stranglehold of PNAC and the MIC is broken, none of us should relax.

[SammyWinstonJack]

58. "I mean, fucking, goddammit!"

[Why Syzygy]

73. No more red line...

Syria signed on to the Chemical Weapons Convention. It prohibits even threatening war against a country who is in the process of disarming.

[Ghost Dog]

111. Well,... For some...

JERUSALEM -- Israel has cheered the Syrians' promise to hand over their chemical weapons and sign the Chemical Weapons Convention, but it is increasingly worried that the international pressure building may soon focus on Israel, which has refused to ratify the treaty and is believed to possess chemical weapons...

... Israeli officials insist that their government is willing to ratify the treaty, but only after others in the region follow suit. Syria and Egypt notably have refused to sign the accord outlawing the use of chemical weapons.

Israel’s regional enemies have insisted they need chemical weapons to counter the threat of the nuclear weapons Israel is believed to possess. No other Middle East nation is thought to have such an arsenal.

In recent days, some Russian diplomats have linked Israel's military capabilities with Syria's, hinting that Israel should be required to ratify the treaty if Syria agrees to...

/... http://www.latimes.com/world/worldnow/la-fg-wn-israel-chemical-weapons-20130912,0,7379241.story

[Why Syzygy]

119. As if..

Israel has ever been influenced by international pressure. If they are "worried", it's a performance.

[nevergiveup]

27. Hear, hear!

[Boom Sound 416]

28. Yes, we're just a vendor now

[spanone]

29. k&r...

[golfguru]

31. If CIA is giving arms to insurgents i Syria

that does not count as war? Does it make a difference if Tomahawks lobbed from ships kill people or our arms kill people? We are borrowing from China to send arms to insurgents in Syria? Dumb and dumber!

The bloody civil war in Syria continues, slaughter of human beings continues. Our arms will only prolong the slaughter. Wars only end with victory. Stalemate means temporary halt but the slaughter will continue. Israel Vs Hezbollah is an example.

[Safetykitten]

32. Jeez, you really jump into the fray and then exit. It's all over huh?

[WilliamPitt]

39. Eh?

I said what I came to say. It's Saturday, and I have a baby to take care of. Plus, there's outside, which is awesome today.

Apologies for not stapling myself to DU to satisfy your understanding of proper participation. Having a life will do that to a guy.

[Safetykitten]

41. And make sure your neighbor enjoying the nice day can tell the difference from your ego and you.

Last edited Sat Sep 14, 2013, 05:25 PM - Edit history (1)

[WilliamPitt]

43. . . . . . . .

[Alamuti Lotus]

86. WHY YOU SO LAZY--your ego couldn't find a kitty facepalm pic?

of course.

[WilliamPitt]

88. The thought never occurred to me.

I thought shocked-cat at the end made the point niftily enough.



P.S. Squee!

[spanone]

49. shame, shame, shame.

[sufrommich]

51. Commenting on someone's children and/or parenting skills

is beyond the pale,no matter how you feel about other DUers opinions.You seem incapable of saying anything without using incredibly personal venom.You need a major time out from DU,I hope you get it.

[Safetykitten]

60. This is the third veiled threat of getting "timed out".

I am sorry if I respond in kind with point of someone telling me I have no life.

People do not like to hear the real stories of poor Democrats. They don't. Look how fast posts get thrown down the line when there is something about someone's poverty, HC situation or just plain bad reminder of how far we have to go.

I think Mr. Pitt can handle the joke. Considering I am one of his devotees.

But you need to back away with the threats of consequences.

[WilliamPitt]

63. I never said you have no life.

Just said I do.

Shots at people's kids are a little rough, I have to say, hence the facepalm festival I replied with.

Glad to hear I have devotees.

[Celefin]

65. Disgusting post

Shame on you. Just that.

[Safetykitten]

68. Disgusting? It's rather a mild and tame joke, considering what I am called pretty much all the time.

I am sick, need mental care, among other things, a loser, intentional check floater, idiot, crybaby, and that's just a partial list. All because I post on HC a great deal. Nobody really defends me, except some very kind people in the same boat. I am stupid and moronic to try to keep what little I have left.

I defend people here and point out outrageous things like the Chelsea Manning "it" controversy, and always try to do the right thing. But still I get no defense. Gay old and jobless, I have been on my own defending myself. Most older gay people have had to do that to some extent, usually more.

Very tame and harmless joke. Really, try to keep things in perspective.

If you like, I will change "baby" to "neighbor".

[Divernan]

79. "Make sure your baby can tell the difference between your ego and you." is what you wrote.

You can edit that all you want, but the original, incredibly nasty version is still there for anyone who chooses to check on your original. Yes, you edited it, but with extremely poor grace, and as if anyone objecting to it was unreasonable. That comment is not a "very tame and harmless joke", and your "perspective" as you refer to it is offensive to the extreme. You express self pity that you are called names and that you get no defense. Well, if your comment about a father-baby relationship is indicative of the level and tone of your comments, it is no wonder. Note that no one has come to your defense on this thread either. That should tell you something.

In my decades of political campaigning, I have pointed out to anyone putting a bumper sticker on their car, that their candidate will be judged in part by their driving habits. Drivers who speed, cut in and out recklessly, don't yield right of way, park illegally in handicapped spots, etc., are judged to be discourteous, reckless assholes/jerks/etc., and the connection made by other drivers is, "Do I want to vote for a candidate who is supported by jerks?" In other words, they hurt the candidate whose sticker is on their bumper.

If you see repeatedly that what you think of as your sense of humor is thought of by others as highly offensive, you might want to consider posting without your "humorous" comments.

[Safetykitten]

96. I don't need lectures from you. As a political campaigner, I am sure you have

said things that far surpass the "highly offensive" and made decisions that are highly questionable in taste. Unless you are a campaigner in some perfect world.

And as a political campaigner, I am sure you are deft at making the small into the large, and masking the real with the unreal.

As a lifelong Democrat, a far left Democrat, I am sorry that you cannot make more out of this. I suppose that what people say you can generate into an outrage. Maybe you should use that outrage on what counts and not on a joke that would not even elicit a chuckle in person.

But it is a baby involved. And we all know that they are sacred and no jokes are allowed, jokes about diapers, eating habits, babies dancing with Pepsi bottles, Etrade babies, babies in space, babies that talk, babies that smack people, babies as ninjas...all this our culture does not allow.

As a gay person, and babyless currently, I will not know what it is like to have a baby currently, but I do know I have a big enough sense of humor when straight people tell me that "you have no idea, and you don't get it", you can't possibly know", or the classic, "you gays are so lucky with the no kid stuff!" or even better..."you want to keep them?" Now I know I should of viciously slapped that parent/s in the face and lectured them on the no baby joke rule. A rule apparently only for people without babies or people who are devoid of anything depicting a baby on television for comedic effect.

But what they don't know is my first nephew and first niece were abandoned by my oldest sister, and I helped raise them.

So create outrage if you want. The gay guy that raised kids made a "highly offensive" joke.

One summer afternoon, way out in the country, my other sister thought it not important to watch my five year old nephew while she decamped to my parents house during a marriage separation. I took that little guy everywhere. I adored him. I loved him so much. While I was home for summer break, while being untended by my sister, he electrocuted himself. I thought I was going to lose my mind. I came home to the state troopers telling me he was dead at the scene.

So me the "fag" gets the dad, baby, child relationship. Don't fucking lecture me so you can contrive outrage.

And on edit...this really is not about the joke is it. It's really about putting the uppity homosexual in what you though would be his no child, no baby experience, no raising kids, no crying over kids that ask where they will stay that night, who will feed them, or what will happen to them, or protecting them place.

[RetroLounge]

115. Keep digging that hole for all to see...

Geez.



RL

[RetroLounge]

66. Are you fucking kidding me?

What a dick-move post, bringing someone's kid into it?



RL

[Safetykitten]

102. And to you...

If I thought that the joke I made was so disgusting, so vile, that I would still post it, maybe you should try something.

Try sitting in the kitchen with three sisters a mother and brother and being asked to please be the one to tell my father my nephew was dead. I spent the summer afternoons after work walking through the fields with him, picking wild Strawberries.

My father got out of his truck and had Strawberries for him from the produce stand in the next town. I had to walk him over to the picnic table and tell him. BY MYSELF!

Think about it.

[RetroLounge]

113. Nice story, bro

which has fuck-all to do with your vile post.



RL

[WilliamPitt]

85. Wow.

At least be honest, with yourself if no one else. You said what you said. Own it and apologize.

You say some vile shit about my child in a post where you're judging me and then pull a sneaky-ass edit? My neighbor?

Weak.

[Safetykitten]

98. Vile? Now it's vile.

And it was not "sneaky-assed"...I wrote about it in the posts above.

[RetroLounge]

114. No, THIS is what you wrote.

"And make sure your baby can tell the difference from your ego and you."

Changing it without apologizing and owning it is cowardice.



RL

[malaise]

33. And that is all that matters

Rec

[mountain grammy]

35. Yes. America is not in a new war.

Could it just be a tiny little bit possible that Obama and his administration might know what they're doing?

Just sayin'

[brooklynite]

37. Too bad the people in Syria can't say the same thing...

[Divernan]

38. I appreciate your well-intentioned efforts, Mr. Pitt.

I for one am vastly relieved that the US did not launch an attack, no matter how "incredibly small". Sadly, the responses here demonstrate that many are not able to take even a moment to enjoy the fact that as we blog, US drones are not inflicting "collateral damage".

I want to comment also, that since you've become a father and must now see the world with a heightened awareness of what current political decisions and actions portend for the next generation, your posts seem, to me at least, to be more measured and somber. And that is at it should be. Keep up the good work.

[Douglas Carpenter]

40. If America is going to be a super power - thank God it has a strong anti-war movement and a war

weary public. Imagine if there was not a strong anti-war tendency in America today. Imagine if the American public was still driven by the same reflexive willingness to launch military strikes that we had post 9/11. Imagine if we had the same kind of "Wag the Dog" body politic we once had when Presidential saber rattling could almost guarantee an increase in Presidential popularity and the darkening of the name of those who stood in the way of military adventurism. Let those who worship at the shrine of personality cult continue to follow their great leaders attributing all that is good to their wisdom. Let those of us who believe in democratic values rejoice that popular opinion does restrain the sword of the emperor.

[bluedeathray]

42. One day at a time Brother.

I wonder what it will take to have a true mass awakening such as we sorely need in America?

[snappyturtle]

46. +1 I think we're getting closer to the awakening. nt

[liberal_at_heart]

55. I was just thinking that. I am extremely concerned this won't work out but today there is peace and

today is a good day.

[ronnie624]

47. You're so far above it all.

[gopiscrap]

52. Yes

[Rex]

54. Smells good in the morning, peace

smells good in the morning.

[bvar22]

61. I'll jump in here with a REC, Will.

We are not bombing anybody into Freedom today,
and that is a GOOD thing.

[Raksha]

78. Yes, I'm very happy about that. I was not looking forward to WWIII. n/t

[libdude]

83. No War

or at least unilateral American military action against Syria. Why not? Thanks to President Obama, Sec. Kerry, President Putin? No thanks to the American people that said No. Credit to those in Congress that listened and said No.
That is why it did'nt happen. To use a famous line," And that's the way it is ".

[joshcryer]

84. I'm should be disappointed, DU is so boring today. The outrage is just completely gone.

Not even posts thanking the President for doing what we wanted, either. Just, random news stories. Any other day there would be dozens of outrage OPs with hundreds of responses. Today? It's like a slow news day for all practical purposes.

This sort of thing makes for really lively discussion, since it's one of those grey areas in international politics where things can go any way and you have a hard time nailing down what's going to happen. I personally did not expect this outcome at all. And yet here we are, the likelihood of a strike is near zero now.

A week ago there were dozens of outrage threads predicting a strike.

[WilliamPitt]

87. Yes, you're should be disappointed.

[joshcryer]

89. I was one of the most outspoken against a strike.

[WilliamPitt]

92. You missed the joke.

"I'm should be disappointed, DU is so boring today. The outrage is just completely gone." - your post

"Yes, you're should be disappointed." - my reply

Grammar humor.

[joshcryer]

93. DOH.

I originally wrote "I'm almost disappointed" but that sounded like I was disappointed in some way (I'm not, I'm ecstatic really). But I took out the "almost" and put "should be" in there. Forgot to fix the "I'm."

Thanks for pointing that out, ain't even going to edit.

[WilliamPitt]

94. :-)

[Rex]

117. So you are saying you are addicted to others being outraged?

You should seek help, that cannot be healthy.

[joshcryer]

120. Nah, simply entertained.

[Rex]

121. It was a joke.

I can understand your POV for the entertainment value. This place is chock full of entertainment as well as news.

[Skittles]

90. avoiding war via bumble-f***

[pasto76]

95. YOU havent EVER woken up to war

try and wrap your head around it. the 'war' you fringe liberals have been screaming about WOULD HAVE LOOKED NOTHING LIKE THE WAR I LIVED.

missile strikes may be an 'act' of war in your books, and I can see the semantics. But they are not a WAR.

people like you, your refusal to acknowledge the difference between the two - is infuriating. It minimizes the 16 months I spent in that fuck hole. It diminishes the sacrifices we made, the soldiers we lost and the lives that are all fucked up because of it. Thats how it feels. From a bunch of people who never even DREAMED of serving the country.
WAR in Iraq.

Equivocating the two with your hyperbolic rhetoric, in fact, will enable to next lunatic to launch another real war in the future.

[JackRiddler]

97. Where was the hole you spent 16 months in?

[DisgustipatedinCA]

112. Quit your whining.

This is the second time in a week I've seen you caterwauling about your time in Iraq. Congratulations for fighting a war we never should have been involved in. I have nothing at all against the military--I used to be a part of it. But when you complain repeatedly about people not understanding war the way you do, you're opening yourself up to criticism about the war that killed hundreds of thousands of innocents. Am I supposed to have respect for your participation in this slaughter?

[Rex]

118. Kewl story bro!

nt.

[King_Klonopin]

99. We are hopelessly lost,

but we're making great time !

I don't care how we got to this place on the war game-board, I'm just
grateful that we haven't moved to the space on the board where we
launch the missiles and the fighter jets.

We at least can be "grateful" for that, right ?

There is a civil war raging in Syria, and that is a horrible situation.
Innocent people are dying, and we who have a conscience would like
to put a stop to it. People are dying, but not at the hands of the U.S.
military's high-tech weapons. America can't fix every conflict in the
world through military intervention.

The war in Iraq was not waged to quell a civil war, or for "humanitarian
and moral" reasons. It was about power and politics, consented upon
through the manipulation of our country's fear and outrage, and based
upon lies. It has solved NOTHING. I prefer that no American be put in
that position ever again.

War in Syria will start with a Tomahawk missile, and could (probably) end
leaving an even worse mess some time around 2023.

"All this killing, it's bad for business. Blood is a big expense."
-- The Turk Solozzo, The Godfather I