Gary Varvel by Gary Varvel

Gary Varvel

Comments (16) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. Kevin Robinson

    Kevin Robinson said, over 3 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 3 years ago

    Yeah now we pay attention to the chemical weapons.

  3. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

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

  4. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, over 3 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.

  5. mrs1wing

    mrs1wing GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    God help us all…

  6. DGF999

    DGF999 said, over 3 years ago

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

  7. DGF999

    DGF999 said, over 3 years ago


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

  8. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 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.

  9. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    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.)

  10. Wraithkin

    Wraithkin said, over 3 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.

  11. jack75287

    jack75287 said, over 3 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.

  12. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, over 3 years ago

    Hmm , was that “Made in Saudi Arabia” in English, or Arabic? Saddam’s chemical weapons “read”, “made in Germany, paid for by America, with kickbacks to Cheney and Rumsfeld”. Anyone remember the “highway of death” in ‘91 when we bombed Saddam’s troops, and civilians, fleeing from Kuwait? (But GHW would support Shia in the south, like he did the Kurds in the north, with air support, and Saddam lasted a decade longer than he might have had we “done the right thing”.)

    Syria is the rock AND the hard place, and Egypt isn’t any better, and the smartest thing we can do is ignore all the chickenhaws (who stand to profit), and keep out of the whole mess unless ALL the U.N. and “allies” agree, and take part in any actions- especially all the Arab and Muslim countries!

  13. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    Thanks for the article. I’m interested in their comparison at the end to a violinist. My own experience as a musician has formed a lot of my ideas about judgment, experience, and common sense — all of which I use as somewhat technical terms. For instance, I would argue that the ability to identify intervals by ear is a matter of what I call judgment, based in experience (rather than experiment), but even though it is an individual perception (and therefore “subjective”) it is common sense, that is, everyone who has the proper training will agree on the judgment, so that it amounts to a common judgment based on sense, that is to say, common sense. This is part of my theory of work in the Humanities, and why it can be rigorous without being “scientific”.

  14. lonecat

    lonecat said, over 3 years ago

    My work isn’t concerned with the social sciences, but with what some people call the “human sciences”. I’m actually not sure why anyone would want to say “human sciences” rather than “humanities”. I guess the word “science” has some prestige. I was a musician before I was anything else, and I never thought I was engaged in “musical science”.
    But I get annoyed by a lot of what gets presented in the humanities, because it seems to me it’s just somebody having an opinion. Opinions are great, interpretations are great, but I think they have to be founded on something. So part of my project has been to try to work out what the foundations of literary scholarship should be. I would never trust a musicologist, for example, who didn’t have a decent background in history and theory, and I would never trust a literary scholar who didn’t have the comparable background. One of the reasons I went into Classics rather then Comp Lit was that Classicists still had a sense that there was such a thing as a foundation, while the Comp Lit crowd were off in the land of deconstruction. All this is probably of no interest to anyone but me.

  15. omQ R

    omQ R said, over 3 years ago


    stated that : "I can honestly say that the use of Iraqi chemical weapons in Syria is a war crime, "

    Say what? Iraqi? Did I miss something?

    Sorry, mate, even if we usually on opposite sides on many things, you normally stick to a rational discourse. Iraqi? Surely you’re not buying into that meme of Saddam transferring his wmds across the border to Syria all those years ago? You are aware that Syria has had its own

    chemical warfare programme for decades ?

    On what basis do you state those were Iraqi weapons? Is there an article or UN Weapons Inspectors’ report I missed?
    Pray, do tell.

  16. Load the rest of the comments (1).