Chip Bok by Chip Bok

Chip Bok

Comments (13) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. mikefive

    mikefive said, over 3 years ago

    Just noticed his web address. Funny!

  2. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 3 years ago

    Over a half a million refugees in Jordan, almost as many in Lebanon and Turkey.
    The red line was crossed a year ago. But if the USA is the only one to really respond militarily, it is more likely to make Arabs angrier with us than to praise us.
    Russia needs to stop shipping supplies to the regime, and Iraq needs to stop letting Iran ship material buy air over Iraqi air space.
    We can’t do this alone, but something needs to be done.

  3. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, over 3 years ago

    The middle east has been a quagmire of senseless death and destruction for centuries, and shows no signs of changing its character. If we intervene, we will lose more American lives and much more money, and the result is unlikely to be any different than if we stay home.

    I vote to stay home.

  4. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, over 3 years ago

    The Amateur is once again beyond his skill set. We know why he won’t release his college transcripts and the reason he was accepted into law school.
    He’s just not very smart.

  5. Bruce4671

    Bruce4671 said, over 3 years ago

    Chain of Custody. Yeah, how would you feel if there actually was a signed invoice for the chemical weapons:

    One ton of mustard gas circa 1975. Created USARL, Adelphi, Maryland.
    Saddam Hussain 1/1/78
    Qusai Hussain 6/25/90
    Bashar al-Assad 7/5/90

    Just a thought.

  6. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, over 3 years ago

    It is impossible to disagree with anything you have said, Ahab. Two questions – If a Halabjah style attack killed hundreds or thousands, would that change your mind? if NATO and the Arab League would agree to take ‘point’ on these missions, would you support the USA using intell resources, drones and rockets to suppress anti aircraft weapons, and other non “boots on the ground” actions?
    If we can’t get other nations to take the load, I don’t think we should go in unless he does a massive WMD attack. If Assad orders/allows gas attacks, et al, on his people, we need to at least to do a no fly zone with attacks on clearly identifiable military infrastructure.
    That last would really please Israel.
    Right now, we are the largest supplier of nonlethal aid and there are diplomats and ‘resources’ on the ground in Syria to advise and aid where practical.
    But it would really be nice not to take point on this one.
    I’m still hoping for Assad’s to leave office, but if not – for a few officers to walk into Assad’s office during a meeting with senior staff and shoot everyone dead.
    What a world.
    I always enjoy reading you, Ahab.

  7. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, over 3 years ago

    OK. I would arm the rebels with weapons and back them up with air support. Thats it, no more.

  8. sclark55

    sclark55 GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Actually, being a civil war (in basically an UNcivilized country), there isn’t going to BE any red tape. But first things first: to even THINK about a term like “chain of custody” with regards to any kind of war has got to be making them laugh at us.
    You gotta wonder – why predicate action on HOW one side butchers the other side? Do we punish people – anyone – for HOW they maim and kill people, or simply because they do so?
    And what if they only killed five people with chemicals? Are we going to take action commensurate with having killed just five people? Will we send marines in to kill five of them, and then leave?
    Or do we think they WILL use more, and therefore act before they do? Wait a second – can we do that, punish for something not yet done? Hmm. Well, in that case, there sure won’t be any chain of custody.
    Mr. President: We KNOW what NoKo and Iran will do when the get a nuclear bomb. Why haven’t we pulled our people out and bombed them?

  9. feverjr

    feverjr said, over 3 years ago

    “In that context, what I’ve also said is that the use of chemical weapons would be a game-changer not simply for the United States but for the international community. And the reason for that is that we have established international law and international norms that say when you use these kinds of weapons you have the potential of killing massive numbers of people in the most inhumane way possible, and the proliferation risks are so significant that we don’t want that genie out of the bottle. So when I said that the use of chemical weapons would be a game-changer, that wasn’t unique to — that wasn’t a position unique to the United States and it shouldn’t have been a surprise.

    And what we now have is evidence that chemical weapons have been used inside of Syria, but we don’t know how they were used, when they were used, who used them. We don’t have a chain of custody that establishes what exactly happened. And when I am making decisions about America’s national security and the potential for taking additional action in response to chemical weapon use, I’ve got to make sure I’ve got the facts. That’s what the American people would expect.

    And if we end up rushing to judgment without hard, effective evidence, then we can find ourselves in a position where we can’t mobilize the international community to support what we do. There may be objections even among some people in the region who are sympathetic with the opposition if we take action. So it’s important for us to do this in a prudent way.

    And what I’ve said to my team is we’ve got to do everything we can to investigate and establish with some certainty what exactly has happened in Syria, what is happening in Syria. We will use all the assets and resources that we have at our disposal. We’ll work with the neighboring countries to see whether we can establish a clear baseline of facts. And we’ve also called on the United Nations to investigate."

    Read more:

  10. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 3 years ago


    Strangely enough, I would have to state that is probably just exactly what President Obama has in mind when he stated that the government of Syria using poison gas would be a “game changer” as far as American military action is concerned. And even that policy would be fraught with danger. The Middle East IS indeed a great quagmire!!

  11. Robert Landers

    Robert Landers said, over 3 years ago


    Ahh, we do not bomb other countries such as NK with nukes, because we are not uncivilized barbarians. The situation in Japan made it at least somewhat justifiable to drop the bombs that we did on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but that situation does not exist anymore. And, by the way just FYI, NK already does have nuclear weapons, they just lack a viable delivery system for them. Should we then remove the dampers in the possible nuclear furnace that our troops are in the Korean Peninsula, and then let loose the nuclear cat on the world? Thus quite possibly releasing a nuclear holocaust upon mankind and forever destroying all that we hold dear and sacred?

  12. TJDestry

    TJDestry GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Lie again. We still have some 19 year olds we haven’t killed or disabled yet.

  13. feverjr

    feverjr said, over 3 years ago

    I printed the transcript for your benefit. You’re the one that should read it and stop listening to the voices in your head.

  14. Refresh Comments.