Doonesbury by Garry Trudeau

Tags: Iraq, election. Add Tags

Shop Collector’s Edition Doonesbury Framed Prints!

Comments (60) Jump to Comments Form

The Old Wolf said, about 1 year ago

An Open Letter to Whomever Wins This Election:

I don’t care about promises, hype, the media, or bloggers.

I want our soldiers home, and out of harm’s way.

I want our economy to be healed.

I want our country’s international reputation out of the toilet.

And I want dignity restored to the Oval Office.

Good luck. Now get to work.
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

ccdesan says:

I want our soldiers home, and out of harm’s way.

I agree, with the proviso that it doesn’t put the rest of us in harm’s way.

I want our economy to be healed.

You’re asking this from the bunch of nitwits that got us into this mess in the first place?
Becca said, about 1 year ago

ccdesan, I want those things too. That’s why I voted in our “No Excuses” early voting. Just like nearly 200,000 of my friends and neighbors in Mecklenburg county, North Carolina.
The_Jerk_Store said, about 1 year ago

UncaAlby says:

ccdesan says:

I want our soldiers home, and out of harm’s way.

I agree, with the proviso that it doesn’t put the rest of us in harm’s way.

Brilliant. So it’s ok for US troops to lose their lives in a pointless, unecessary war provided that you get to pretend that you’re safe from non-threats. Which would you say describes you more: utterly selfish or utterly delusional?
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

The_Jerk_Store says:

UncaAlby says:

[I want our soldiers home] with the proviso that it doesn’t put the rest of us in harm’s way.

Brilliant. So it’s ok for US troops to lose their lives in a pointless, unnecessary war

Well, that’s probably one of the lamest statements you could make, but I suppose with calling yourself “The Jerk Store” that I should expect nothing less.

OBVIOUSLY — — if US troops are keeping the rest of us safe and out of harm’s way, then the war is NOT pointless and unnecessary. That should be a statement of simple logic without need for explanation. This is the whole reason why we have troops ready to lay down their lives in the first place — to keep the rest of us safe.

Obviously whether US troops actually are keeping the rest of us safe and out of harm’s way remains a matter that’s open to debate. Yes, your opinion is quite clear. Just please recognize that, just because you and all your liberal buddies agree with each other in a massive “kumbaya” sing-along doesn’t mean you’re correct.

Which would you say describes you more: utterly selfish or utterly delusional?

You’re projecting again.
HUMPHRIES said, about 1 year ago

T J S, Ask “W” and crew, then consider “Uncle Dick” and business associates.
NoFearPup said, about 1 year ago

The election is also about how people can be in a bubble for twenty years and not know what is going on in front of them. It’s 2008 Trudeau!
KingRat said, about 1 year ago

“People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
– George Orwell
Doctor Toon said, about 1 year ago

What we need is a leader who will deploy the troops in an effective manner, not just one who wants to “win”.
BirishB said, about 1 year ago

Unca –
“if US troops are keeping the rest of us safe and out of harm’s way, then the war is NOT pointless and unnecessary”
You’re begging the question: To suggest that soldiers are fighting to keep us safe as an explanation for why they are keeping us safe is a clear fallacy of argument. And if that same fallacy of argument is being perpetrated on a grand scale (and costing American lives!), then it is not OBVIOUS, it is WITHOUT LOGIC and it DOES REQUIRE EXPLANATION.
Susan001 said, about 1 year ago

A massive “kumbaya” sing-along?
Once again, UncaAlby has shot himself in the foot.
I wonder if he’ll use that same old lame excuse: that I lack “reading comprehension”. Well, I don’t! And I can read between the lines, too!
James7344 said, about 1 year ago

This is what you get when you vote for a president you’d have a beer with, instead of for a professional who can do the job.
pibfanbrux said, about 1 year ago

I’m with you ccdesan. As am American living abroad for 20 years now. I have been appalled by the destruction of our hard-won reputation built up over the last 300 years. It has been so sad for those of us abroad to witness the debacle on so many fronts that has been the Bush administration. Fingers crossed for tomorrow.
Orgelspieler said, about 1 year ago

pibfanbrux - For the first 70 years of the last 300, we were still a bunch of little colonies. I assume you are guilty only of a typing error. wink
Dypak said, about 1 year ago

UncaAlby,
I’m going to try and be real careful here. I don’t know you and I don’t want to offend you. I just want you to be sure you understand that we are in a pointless war in Iraq and it is a war we caused ourselves. Every life lost in Iraq, ours, theirs and anyone elses, is a precious thing lost. I’m saying this after I served 23 years in the Army. I have a son in the Army. Every male member of my family has been in the military, and many of the women. I have close family in Iraq, all safe, so far, thank God. We have no business there, except to fix what WE messed up. Afghanistan is another matter and I pray God guides whomever we elect tomorrow.

ccdesan’s letter is right dead on and you should echo it, rather than add ‘provisios’ and other ignorant comments. Our country is screwed up and we need to find someone who can fix it. Even if they’re the ones who screwed it up in the first place.
Doctor Toon said, about 1 year ago

Dypak - Don’t worry about offending Unc. He loves to be offended. He lives to be offended. That’s why he posts here.
pibfanbrux said, about 1 year ago

Roger, but not That one etc.
Yes, I am aware that we were not a country then, but we were nonetheless already building up that well-deserved reputation….so I’ll stick with my math ;-)
Oh, and btw, my family on both sides were around in said colonies already in the 1640’s which is a bit more than 300 years….
Gweedo Murray said, about 1 year ago

Begging Sir Alby’s pardon but wasn’t the economy in plus figures when Clinton left office ? I doubt that your own debt mirrors big government, as it stands now.

As far as war goes; the Democrat Johnson was just as capable as the current crop. Some people live for the “excitement”, tension and sense of “higher” calling that a war time environment engenders. Adolph Hitler being a prime, negative example. Winston Churchill being a positive example. We’ll always have black and white. Reducing collateral damage, in lieu of peace, might be the most realistic option.

I have a friend who’s going on 90, who was in the Ardennes and was a P.O.W. in Hitler’s Germany. He’s enjoyed living in peacetime but was never afraid of hard, dirty work. As the owner of the machine shop that I worked in, for awhile, I saw first hand his dedication to his business and his men Who “are like sons to me.”

For a man who had “only” [emphasis mine] been an infantry soldier he was well read in the humanities and world history; prerequisites for anyone in the position of making far reaching political decisions. Ed always had a little story or homily, sometimes a joke to back a point that he was making.
I learned more about living than I did about machine shop practices from this old boy.
For better or worse; I get a kick out of Unca’s discourses. BTW I have met Democratic peace type Vermonters who have an inherent streak reminiscent of Susan001. Sorry Sue. Even though I was in U.S.A.F. I didn’t believe in war. In fact I feel it should only be used as
”the court of last resort”

Keep the rants coming guys. This junk food junky can’t get enuff !
txmystic said, about 1 year ago

What is the definition of “victory” in the war on terrorism?
Susan001 said, about 1 year ago

Gweedo, did I give you the impression that I am in favor of this war? If so, I humbly apologize.
No, I have been totally opposed to this criminal action since Day 1. The only “positive” aspect of this damned war and occupation is that it has made Bush/Cheney/Halliburton wealthy. American has had to put up with this administration’s lies for 8 miserable years, and I hope and pray this nightmare will end very soon.
txjeeper said, about 1 year ago

You know what astonishes me is that all of these people out there who claim to be “well educated in the issues” seems to forget who really runs this country. It is not President Bush, although he does have some power, but it is the congress who can overrule him who has the real power. And it also baffles me that so many people forgot that during Clinton’s rain of stupidity (yes I am a Republican but I am also a little disenchanted with our Pres.) that the congress was controlled by the republicans. So the prosperity that we had during that time was not Bill’s to claim, but claim he did. Also people need to look back and realize that our economy was doing ok up until the last 2 years until the Dem’s took over congress and really screwed bleeep up.
Susan001 said, about 1 year ago

I wonder if they ever run out of screen space for all these messages.
BirishB said, about 1 year ago

txjeeper – Wrong.

The congress does not “run the country” as you suggest. The congress does suggest legislation that the president can either enforce or veto. It’s about checks balances, and no one branch holds any more sway than another (including the judicial branch).

As for the “do-nothing Congress” … well, that’s wrong, too. The current Congress inherited a broken, vastly deregulated financial system and a Commander-in-Chief who redefined abuse of power and wanton use of line-item vetoes. In truth, there’s plenty of blame to go around on all sides, so to say that the democratic congress is to blame misses the point.

Same can be said for your suggestion that the republican congress did all the good during the Clinton era – that is, that statement is also wrong. He is credited on both sides for strengthening the economy in his first term with initiatives he brought to Congress. He based his economic policy largely on fiscal responsibility, strengthening the middle class and balancing the budget (and now that I think about it, that sounds kind of familiar?).
circlexranch said, about 1 year ago

What dypak said. He has the stripes (literally and figuratively) and I agree 100%. I was against the war from day 1. I argued for hours with neocon types about WMD and offered a bet of their favorite bottle of liquor when WMDs were found. To date, I’ve not had to pay off yet. Here’s to election day tomorrow and the one over-riding reality. If you don’t VOTE, you can’t KVETCH!
Radical-Knight said, about 1 year ago

Do they run out of space? Negative. You can filibuster and rant so long as your fingers and keyboard hold up and there will still be room for more.

Got anything you want to sound off about? This is the politicrap channel for any and all to make their feelings heard.

Everybody has the right to say what they feel, all the Susan001’s and the UncaAlby’s out there, I like hearing what EACH has to say; but neither has the right to tell me how I should think or what I can say.

Please continue.
Orgelspieler said, about 1 year ago

pibfanbrux - Back in the 1640’s, “our” reputation consisted largely of intolerance toward one set of my ancestors (i.e. Roman Catholics) and a rather murderous antipathy toward another set of my ancestors (i.e. the Narragansetts and Iroquois). Most of my ancestors were here then, as well, even if some of them were in Quebec and some others were in the Hawaiian islands (which YOUR ancestors later stole from mine, just like they did in New England). However… after that many generations, we’re pretty much all related anyhow and staying mad just puts wrinkles in the forehead.
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

BirishB says:

You’re begging the question:

No, I’m explaining my statement. Ccdesan said he wants our soldiers home and safe. I said I agree, with the proviso that it doesn’t put the rest of us in harm’s way.

It’s a very simple statement. No one has convinced me that pulling our troops home *is* the best course of action that keeps Americans and American interests safe.

Yes, I know the liberals believe that Al Queda and their cohorts are all a figment of Bush/Cheney’s imagination, created out of whole cloth to make Halliburton rich. I’m sorry if I don’t quite share that opinion.

There are many things wrong with this war, I suspect we’ll have it for a long time, even if Obama wins tomorrow – for one thing, both parties are using it as a vehicle to smuggle Pork. That’s one of the things that’s making it so expensive. Campaign rhetoric aside, I don’t think the Democrats are going to give up that gravy train so easily.

But I am not convinced that stopping terrorists and keeping America safe is among those wrong things.
WickedCrazy said, about 1 year ago

I said it before and I’ll say it again.Opinions are like A**holes;everyone has one and they all stink! Quit trying to shove all this opinionated garbage down peoples throats, tommorrow go Vote Your Conscience.Whoever wins,wins.If you don’t know who your going to vote for by now…than there’s something wrong.
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

Susan001 says:

And I can read between the lines, too!

Yes, I know, you see all sorts of hallucinations between the lines.

Reading comprehension? You? Don’t make me laugh.
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

WickedCrazy says:

Quit trying to shove all this opinionated garbage down peoples throats,

Stop reading them.
WickedCrazy said, about 1 year ago

UncafriggenknowitallAlby:I’m Actually for the most part on your side.But it’s people like you who make the rest of us conservatives look bad.
Susan001 said, about 1 year ago

Yes, UncaAlby, you racist pig, I can comprehend what you say on these boards. The question is–can you?
Tukla Ratte said, about 1 year ago

TXJeeper: Please crack open a history book instead of getting all your information from Rush Limbaugh.

“it is the congress who can overrule him who has the real power”

That’s hilarious. Bush has amassed so much power in the executive branch now, he can flagrantly ignore the laws he signs when he feels like it with no repercussions, and frequently does.

Bill Clinton got a balanced budget over the Republicans’ objections by calling their bluff several times and shutting down the government by refusing to sign their budgets until they fixed them. As we have seen in the past quarter century, Republican presidents spend money at a vastly faster rate than Democrats ever do.

“our economy was doing ok up until the last 2 years until the Dem’s took over congress”

No, it wasn’t. Growth has been miserably small the whole time, and Bush has been pouring hundreds of billions into the Iraq sinkhole. This latest disaster is the result of long-standing policies, not something implemented in the past two years. Anyway, if you look at the actual laws being passed, you’ll see that Congress has basically given Bush everything he wants, regardless of which party has been in power there. The Democrats do share some of the blame for what’s happening now, not because Democrats have bad policies but because they have not stood up to the Republicans like Bill Clinton did and shout “NO!” when they want to burn more money and more of our civil liberties.
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

doctortoon says:

Dypak - Don’t worry about offending Unc. He loves to be offended. He lives to be offended. That’s why he posts here.

That’s not true at all. I tolerate being offended. What I’m looking for is healthy discussion.

I don’t get much of that in conservative echo chambers. Just like you don’t get much of it in the liberal echo chambers.

But try to remember – just because you’re in an echo chamber and keep hearing your same opinion bouncing back at you all the time, doesn’t mean you’re right. Indeed, if you’re so certain you’re right that you no longer need to explain it to anyone in a rational manner, it’s probably the most important time to take another look and make sure you’re not just another echo.
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

Susan001 says:

UncaAlby, you racist pig,

You really don’t know what you’re talking about, do you?
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

WickedCrazy says:

UncafriggenknowitallAlby:I’m Actually for the most part on your side. But it’s people like you who make the rest of us conservatives look bad.

Well EXCUUUUUUUUUUSE ME for being so horrible as to express myself in a public forum!

And how is it being “mostly on my side” to tell people to stop posting their “opinionated garbage”? Freedom of speech doesn’t imply an obligation to listen – if you don’t want to read people’s opinionated garbage, DON’T READ IT.
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

Radical-Knight says:

but neither has the right to tell me how I should think or what I can say.

mmmmm – technically speaking –

We do have the right to tell you how you should think or what you can say.

But you also have the right to just ignore us!
UncaAlby said, about 1 year ago

txmystic says:

What is the definition of “victory” in the war on terrorism?

That is a damned good question.
Gweedo Murray said, about 1 year ago

Not at all Susan. I have read you to be exactly opposed to the action. Can’t say as I’m fond of it myself.

When I was in Vermont one year, about 2001, I met a fella where I was staying and I got the distinct impression that he might be averse to me after I admitted that I had been in the service.
I was a noncombat worker ie: Masonry Specialist. I was, I admit, one of those guys who was more interested in getting high than in how many bodies I could pile up with the M-16. Was at the rifle range all of three times in my whole enlistment.

I brought you up in my last post because your “apparent” umbrage at UncaAlby’s presence in the column reminded me of peace loving folk who have underlying hostility.

I don’t vote (shame on me) but I have been impressed of the importance of knowing what you’re voting for and why. I think that with the Bush years behind us,
I hope, that I would vote for “The other team”, or independently altogether. Voting for someone because they got a
BIGGER VOICE or PRETTY EYES
to see all the way to Rooskyland with doesn’t impress me as a good use of the ‘power of vote’.

I am a member of D.A.V. and get the bi-monthly magazine. There are compelling stories of tragedy and recovery and occasionally graphic photos. The spouses and family who stand by their disabled loved ‘one’ are to be commended and admired for the fine people they are. Keep pulling for peace Sue. The Wall came down, Rocky Flats was closed and as far as I know they’re still cleaning up at Hanford. See you at Pibgorn.
attyush said, about 1 year ago

whoa…the name calling just doesn’t stop. neither in the campaigns nor in our public forums. Actually it’s a lot simpler here since all commenters are anonymous, hiding behind their computer screens. Folks, let us continue having a civil dialogue, discussion and by all means let us disagree with each other…But please stop the name callings.
txmystic said, about 1 year ago

UncaAlby says:

txmystic says:

What is the definition of “victory” in the war on terrorism?

That is a damned good question.

Should we not have had an answer before declaring war on terror?
attyush said, about 1 year ago

Well, there are really two aspects to this victory. 1 - Millitary victory. This was never really in question. The issue really is how best (after Saddam) US can help support Iraq without bleeding itself to death. However, this millitary victory does not mean a victory on the war on terror. But it kind of sets a precedent that US might attack any country that it deems unsafe…Not the smartest move, but again, Bush alone did not have the power to take it on. It had support from all quarters.

2 - Victory over the war on terror is a difficult task. It requires all like minded countries to come together and take the terrorists out. But countries are also like individuals…so they ask the same question. “Why should I care”. Building a common task force is not only difficult, but next to impossible. So once in a while, you do have to go solo since you are the one who is suffering.

To answer the question now, “Winning the war on terrorism is primarily centered upon winning the struggle of ideas”. Now go figure how to achieve this.

I beat around the bush quite a lot.
BirishB said, about 1 year ago

Unca – Don’t apologize for disagreeing. In fact, keep disagreeing. THAT is what makes dialogue worthwhile. And, ironically to some in this forum, discord is what promotes change and moves the dialectic of history.

Terrorists are not a figment of anyone’s imagination. But to the question of ‘why we fight’ we keep getting an answer that ‘because we fight is why we fight.’ That circuitous, empty logic demands an explanation.

So why? WMD? No. Unmitigated pork? Perhaps, but that’s not good enough. The neo-con belief that strong foreign policy and promoting global democracy builds domestic security? People are too afraid to say it, but that seems to be the real reason. And that is bad for America. And in my humble little opinion, pulling back the troops IN A RESPONSIBLE MANNER would do more to promote security than furthering our aggression (for lack of a better term).

We tried it one way, and pre-emptive strike is looking more and more like “The War on Drugs Redux” than a viable solution. Time to try something else. Perhaps what you see as liberal grandstanding is a demand for a solution that causes less harm.
BirishB said, about 1 year ago

attyush:
““Winning the war on terrorism is primarily centered upon winning the struggle of ideas””

Are you quoting that from somewhere? ‘cause that’s dead on. Or is that your own. If so … right.

We’re not in a war with clearly identified objectives, and it appears we are in a war of attrition. We’ve (America) tried that before; didn’t work out too well. So how to win the ideological war?

Well, we “fought” an ideological war of fear against Communism for 30-odd years, and it took dialogue to end that. I would suggest that through mutual understanding, we could achieve close to the same now (ach, I just know I’ll get harpooned for that thought!). But you can’t ever “win” a war of idea with sabre rattling.
WickedCrazy said, about 1 year ago

UncaA**wipe:That’s all I’m saying cause that’s what you are.
txmystic said, about 1 year ago

BirishB says:

Well, we “fought” an ideological war of fear against Communism for 30-odd years, and it took dialogue to end that. I would suggest that through mutual understanding, we could achieve close to the same now

That is what I was getting at…the ideological dialogue has been lost in a barrage of malignments. First and foremost, we must as a nation agree with what we are doing, and in the rush to do something, anything, after 9/11 was too soon for rational debate.

Let us hope it shall begin, because sending our troops to whatever soveriegn nation might harbor a terrorist cell amounts to global whack-a-mole, and my many trips to Chuck E. Cheese’s in my youth has proven it is not the best way to win tickets (or enlist the aid of foreign allies).
attyush said, about 1 year ago

@txmystic

While I do not agree with the Iraq war, I fully support the actions taken after 9/11. It was a horrific crime that deserved a strong response, not a dialog. Will it affect innocents? You bet. Did we have other options? None.
txmystic said, about 1 year ago

attyush:

And just how much of an “effect” on innocents is acceptable? It is a slippery slope.

And your flat declaration that there was no other option after 9/11 suggests that the current situation is acceptable. Is it?
Frida Bonita said, about 1 year ago

There are three branches in the United States government as established by the Constitution. First, the Legislative branch makes the law. Second, the Executive branch executes the law. Last, the Judicial branch interprets the law. Each branch has an effect on the other.

It would be short sighted and wrong to give blame to one branch alone.

We, The United States of America have been fortunate to have lived with out the threat of terrorism. Also a bit naive. Look outside our boarders, The British Isles lives with terrorism as does Spain, Italy, France, India, Nepal, most Latin American countries, Pakistan, Israel, Palestine and most African nations. We globally have been living with terrorism from with in our boarders and from foreign forces. We were not the first targets nor will we be the last.

We had a golden opportunity with most of the world after 9/11 to forge better diplomatic relations and come up with a global assist on fighting terrorism . There was a chance for open exchange about terrorism and willingness from Russia and China as well as Israel and South Korea to work with us. Instead, we were given information, that has come to light was not factual, that we should take out Saddaam and all our trouble will be gone.

So, sorry but Al-Qaeda does not recognize borders but also does not reside in Iraq.

Al-Qaeda has its origins in the uprising against the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan. Thousands of volunteers from around the Middle East came to Afghanistan as mujahideen, warriors fighting to defend fellow Muslims. In the mid-1980s, Osama bin Laden became the prime financier for an organization that recruited Muslims from mosques around the world. These “Afghan Arab” mujahideen, which numbered in the thousands, were crucial in defeating Soviet forces.

After the Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan, bin Laden returned to his native Saudi Arabia. He founded an organization to help veterans of the Afghan war, many of whom went on to fight elsewhere (including Bosnia) and comprise the basis of al-Qaeda. We, the US of A have given money and arms to Al-Qaeda in the past. They were freedom fighters and we liked that. We didn’t like that they felt we were infringing on their rights and culture, hence 9/11.

As we know, Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction, and as tyrannical as Sadaam was, he had nothing to do with the attack of 9/11.

So, let’s go after bin Laden and crew. It would be very difficult for the US to start causing any problems with Saudi Arabia. We need their oil and have ties that go back in our nations history both Rep. and Dem.

So, IF we are really going to do something about the war on terrorism let’s take some geography lessons, get straight facts and be willing to sever our ties with OPEC.

The name calling and pointing fingers is not going to make us a stronger better nation. We are all part of this problem and need to be active in the solutions.

I was just a twinkle in my moms eye when JFK asked:
“Ask not what your country can do for you but what you can do for your country.”

This administration along with the next dozen isn’t going to fix our problems; we are going to fix our country, there is no other way.

What can I do today to make my home, work place, community a better place?

Did I tell my children something positive, did I tell them that I love them, that I am proud of their accomplishments?

Have I thanked my partner, my colleague, my child’s teacher, a neighbor, a friend for their time, effort or understanding

We need to get it together and be strong as one.

United we stand, divided we fall.
Margueritem said, about 1 year ago

Amen, Frida, AMEN! So well put.

« Previous 1 2 Next »

Comics A-Z Navigation

Doonesbury-shortsbunching

The Perfect Gift: Collectible Framed Comics.

Collectible Print of Doonesbury

About Doonesbury

G.B. Trudeau’s Doonesbury is currently in its thirty-ninth year, tracking its eighth presidential administration. Trudeau maintains his studio in New York and his Web presence at www.doonesbury.com.

Visit Doonesbury.com
Visit The Sandbox

© 2009 Universal Press Syndicate - All Rights Reserved.