Our work is not finished

Posted Wednesday, September 11, 2013, at 8:36 AM
View 10 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • *

    "We can't solve every problem, but we try to solve the ones we can."

    Why don't we start with our own problems here on our soil, you can't take of others until you can take care of yourself. And I don't understand why America needs to be the country that paddles these bullies. I am sorry but I don't care, whats the difference in using a poison and using missles and bombs?

    -- Posted by shockwave on Wed, Sep 11, 2013, at 3:58 PM
  • Dear Editor:

    We don't think the USA needs to attack, bomb or police Syria but I understand your rationale and cannot find much fault. But for my friends, family and co-workers, we all are united in a "no war, no bombing" mindset and opinions. To each their own.

    As far a Moral majority's logic is concerned, we all wonder what side he would have been on in WWII? The Nazis didn't seem all that friendly to the Red Commie's of Russia so that must mean the USA was supporting the USSR? Japan didn't seem all that friendly to the Red Chinese? That darn old critical thinking or lack there of surfaces again with the ultra-conservatives.

    Shockwave, the difference is chemical weapons are considered weapons of mass destruction and have been outlawed in civilized warfare since about 1930.

    -- Posted by sara-connor on Wed, Sep 11, 2013, at 4:55 PM
  • The United States, Great Britain, France and other countries stood by while the Holocaust was going on to avoid war. Before World War II America was very isolationist and Roosevelt ran for President on a campaign that we weren't going into the war. Secretly, he knew that we had to, in order to stop Hitler. Japan attacking us was probably an answer to many prayers.

    I wonder how history will judge us in regards to chemical warfare against children in Syria?

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Wed, Sep 11, 2013, at 8:11 PM
  • CoolBreeze you remind me of someone else that just liked to bash liberals and used other people's words to do it rather than his own. -- Do you have anything to provide on the subject of the blog?

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Thu, Sep 12, 2013, at 7:10 AM
  • *

    Re: moral majority's comment at the top o' the comments

    Anybody else had the chance to see Argo?

    As I understand the basis of the Iranian Revolution, Jranians revolted against the Shah and the support the United States had provided the Shah during his nearly 40 year reign.

    You reckon we're going to win over a lot of Syrians by supporting Assad in his fight with al-kida (sic)?

    What do you think of Assad's "get 'em while they're young" approach? Do you suppose he employs that approach to offset "al-kida's" efforts at recruiting youngsters?

    -- Posted by Dave Thompson on Thu, Sep 12, 2013, at 9:06 AM
  • I have to admit that the Syrian thing has had me puzzled. I found an article from a someone that seems to know what he is talking about. The whole situation of why Syria is fighting, and why the chemical weapons use are a really big deal was explained very well.

    "9 questions about Syria you were too embarrassed to ask"


    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Thu, Sep 12, 2013, at 6:24 PM
  • Moral majority you are picking and choosing out of context excerpts from an article that was intended to provide more information on a complicated situation.

    You seem to be missing the main points.

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Fri, Sep 13, 2013, at 3:10 PM
  • *

    Bad guys trying to retain or gain control of banned weapons. What will Russia be stuck with if Assad falls? They have a presence in Syria that they may not want to give up if the wrong bad guys win.

    Time will tell how this will game out.

    The nations involved may be playing agreed roles. Russia has the presence in Syria and Putin doesn't want to suffer the indignation of seeing their ally walloped by the United States; Putin doesn't want a bunch of belligerent radicals with chemical weapons on their continent. Russia is under threat from Islamic fundamentalists as well.

    Russia plays peacemaker and the United States keeps the big stick handy.

    Assad consistently denied having chemical weapons until this week. Now, he's admitted that Syria does possess them. In fact, he's willing to give them up and join other nations in condemning them.

    Both Putin and President Obama are putting pressure on Assad.

    -- Posted by Dave Thompson on Fri, Sep 13, 2013, at 5:44 PM
  • 50 years from now we may find that Putin and Obama were working together to solve a problem or at least mitigate the risks.

    -- Posted by Sam_1776 on Fri, Sep 13, 2013, at 6:04 PM
  • Who is putting and what does golf have to do with Syria?

    -- Posted by Geordey on Mon, Sep 16, 2013, at 6:36 PM
Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration: