Re: the recent Iranian peace agreement.

Image from LA Times

A brilliant post from a brilliant writer named Quaker Bill at Democratic Underground.

Peace agreements can always be criticized as not being “harsh enough” toward the “enemy.” Peace is, precisely, not harsh. Agreements are things both sides consent to. I have not heard of an agreement where one side consents to being bombed by the other.

Peace agreements are always attacked by the “manly” crew as weak and shortsighted, simply because they can do it and seem more “manly” and “brave” doing so. Of course, they are being “manly” and “brave” with the lives of other people’s children, but that never holds them back.