This and that

...war and peace edition...

Some thoughts (by a woman) about all the allegations of a "war on women:"

This is NOT kindergarten.  LIFE is unfair.  NATURE is unfair.  Civilization and society can only go so far to compensate for the basic inequality of nature.  It is not the job of nature or government to turn us all into neuters with the exact same aptitudes and abilities.  And I, for one, am glad.  If you’re not, consider your relationship with your own gender.  I suggest your war is mostly internal. If you truly believe refusing to force employers to pay for birth control is a war on women, then you are fragile little flowers who deserve to experience life practically anywhere else in the world.

Some reconsideration whether the 'cure' for an Iranian nuclear program might be worse than the cause:

...within the intelligence community and among its retirees there are some experienced analysts who believe that Iran’s leaders with nuclear weapons wouldn’t be much different than they are today, with their first concern being holding on to power, not using a weapon to wipe out Israel and thereby bring about their own destruction. ... Pillar also questions why the argument that any Israeli/U.S. attack on Iran to set back its nuclear program uses the “best case” scenario that Tehran’s response would be limited, while only a “worst case” analysis is made of Iran getting the bomb. If the armed attack by Israel or the United States is analyzed under “worst case” scenarios, Pillar says, “we would be hearing about a regional conflagration involving multiple U.S. allies, sucking in U.S. forces beyond the initial assault.”
He said such an attack also “would be an immediate political gift to Iranian hard-liners.” 

With so many opportunities to embroil ourselves in mischief abroad, let's hope our nation has, indeed, learned a few things about the limits and utility of its military power.  What would Ron do?