Gary Varvel by Gary Varvel

Gary Varvel

Comments (24) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Kevin Robinson

    Kevin Robinson said, over 2 years ago

    they need to civilized there war by letting the politicians run it. That way it can last 4 times longer than and cost 10 times as much in all categories with no definite out come..

  2. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 2 years ago

    Yeah now we pay attention to the chemical weapons.

  3. denis1112

    denis1112 said, over 2 years ago

    Syria’s chemical weapons (WMDs) were shipped to him by Saddam Hussein
    Yes they have satellite videos of the convoys leaving Iraq going to Syria.Strange how the left wing news nerds swept that under the rug and ignored the chemical and biological weapons that were found.IED’s have been found with artillery projectiles filled with Sarin gas.The way that they found them was there were Iraqi passers by laying in the road and on the sidewalk that passed out from the leaking gas.But the left won’t report that sort of thing.

  4. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 2 years ago

    I would bet he will. Will you criticize him if he does?

  5. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, over 2 years ago

    I’ll admit it. This is one damn tough call to make. Nobody wants troops sent in to a civil war that does not appear to pose a threat to America.
    On the other hand, regimes across the world seem to already view us as a paper tiger the last few years. Lots of bark about red lines, yet never a bite. This opens up numerous possibilities of aggression by unfriendly nations without any fear of repercussions.
    O applied for this job and now he needs to show that he’s qualified by making the right decisions.

  6. mrs1wing

    mrs1wing GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    God help us all…

  7. DGF999

    DGF999 said, over 2 years ago

    Should be interesting to see how zero, I mean O, handles this… Will there be an official announcement of WMDs

  8. DGF999

    DGF999 said, over 2 years ago


    Will you support him if he does? Or will this be another “illegal war”? And what will be the difference, if not?

  9. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 2 years ago


    I have to admit that there are some problems for which I do not have solutions, and this is one of them. I honestly don’t know what the right course of action is. I can say that I’m pretty sure a major invasion with a lot of US boots on the ground would be a bad idea. My hunch is that a limited action wouldn’t do any good, and anything more than that would cause more harm than good, but I could be wrong. As for the legality, I’m no expert, but my understanding is that a limited strike would be legal without consulting Congress. I’m not saying I would approve, but I don’t think it would be illegal.

  10. martens is REALLY fed up

    martens is REALLY fed up said, over 2 years ago


    Don’t you think it would be a good thing if we could admit that for some situations there are no good answers? I agree with your assessment of the options for the Syrian problem, and I rather think that there is no solution available, at least in the short run.

  11. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 2 years ago

    @martens is REALLY fed up

    Yes, but there are probably two different situations: (1) there is no good answer; (2) there is a good answer, but I don’t know it, and maybe no one else does either. (Some famous math problems belong in the second group.)

  12. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago


    I have yet to see any proof that those convoys were what you say they are. Seems weird that Saddam would disarm in preparation for being invaded. Which he didn’t. He didn’t have any viable WMD’s, the UN took care of that long before the two invasions by the USA and others.

  13. Night-Gaunt49

    Night-Gaunt49 GoComics PRO Member said, over 2 years ago

    Funny how the US is so particular in how a govt kills its rebelling citizens. Why only some poison gases but not others like the so-called “tear gas used here.”

  14. Wraithkin

    Wraithkin said, over 2 years ago

    lonecat, I’m with you on this. There is no good answer. As tempting of a target as Obama is, I don’t envy his position. But, whatever his decision is, in order to maintain any sense of legitimacy, he must obey the war powers act. He’s already toed the line on this one. Full-on engagement of US Troops in another mid-eastern country without that will completely destroy his credibility.

    I honestly think this is a damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don’t. If we go in, we’ll be inserting ourselves as the police force… mind you, a police force that everyone loves to hate. If we don’t go in, the next regime may be worse than the current one, or worse.

    I can honestly say that the use of Iraqi chemical weapons in Syria is a war crime, and the leaders must be held accountable. To do anything less is to condone said actions.

    I think we need to learn about what happened with Somalia and take a lesson from how that ended. If anything, we send troops in to secure humanitarian locations to protect women and children and nothing more. Provide UN-Sanctioned Safe havens where refugees can come. They are stripped of all weapons on their way in, and they can at least live in peace while the blockheads duke it out in the sand.

  15. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 2 years ago


    My personal thoughts are maybe take out a good portion of the Syrian Air Force then a no fly zone for a short period of time. Make them know they will be hurt.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (9). Logo


We're working on some exciting new things for GoComics, and we'd like your feedback. Click below to see if you qualify for a chance to preview our upcoming changes and receive a $50 Amazon gift card!