Rob Rogers by Rob Rogers

Rob Rogers

Comments (16) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. dtroutma

    dtroutma GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    Right. Let’s leave this one to someone else.

  2. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 2 years ago

    Do you mean your heroes of the Democrat party like
    And over a hundred others that voted for the war in Iraq?

  3. TJDestry

    TJDestry GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    My doctor wanted to remove a skin tag from my back, but my uncle died during open heart surgery, so I said the risk was way too high.

  4. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, about 2 years ago

    Bush was naive in believing that the opposition party would honor their voting for military action. He may have been misguided but the Democrat Party flat out broke their word to the people they authorized to go to war. All for political reasons.

  5. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, about 2 years ago

    It is one thing to publicly oppose a President, quite another to feign support then actively undermine.

  6. Michael wme

    Michael wme said, about 2 years ago

    But this time is different. Just like last time was different.

    Saddam was tried, convicted, and lynched for gassing Iranians with US/European gas during the Iraq-Iran war. So we know Saddam had chemical weapons because the US has the invoices. He just didn’t have any when Bush, Jr ordered the invasion.

    In the case of Syria, SOMEONE deployed a chemical weapon last week that severely affected more than 3,000 and killed between 200 and 2,000 (depending on whom one believes).

    Obama swore an oath he’d decapitate Syria if any chemical weapons were used. Of course, Obama has irrefutable proof that the Syrian government was the one using the weapons, but, sadly, that proof is invisible/classified Top Secret/you don’t need to see it, you can trust Obama. And anyway, it doesn’t matter, Obama never said it had to be the Syrian government that used the chemical weapons.

    Syria is NOT in a civil war. Arabs who’ve heard the opposition forces on YouTube assure me that few, if any, of those fighting against the government have Syrian accents. Syria is very valuable real estate, once owned by the Ottomans and then by France. Saudi Arabia has said Syria must be all for them. And there is proof that the mercenary army paid by Saudi Arabia has chemical weapons. So the mercenary army paid by Saudi Arabia has means, motive (i.e., false flag), and opportunity. The Syrian government may have means and opportunity, but no motive. So which is the more likely perpetrator?

    The mercenary army from Qatar was fighting the mercenary army from Saudi Arabia and winning (both wanted all of Syria for themselves), so the Saudis called Obama and Obama ordered the Emir of Qatar to step down, proving that Obama is in the Saudis’ pocket.

    Obama swore an oath, and Salome is waiting for her head on a platter, so the cruise missiles will fly next week.

    Sorry, Syrian civilians. Someone has to be sacrificed, and you’re convenient.

  7. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, about 2 years ago

    Of course, there WERE no WMDs in Iraq, nor was there actually a reason to invade Iraq.
    Still, no one appointed the US to be the policeman to the world, and we’re not good at it anyway.

  8. furnituremaker

    furnituremaker said, about 2 years ago

    good shot, Mangus…and TRUE

  9. The Wolf In Your Midst

    The Wolf In Your Midst said, about 2 years ago

    And Saddam was our best bud when he was fighting Iran, and we bent over backwards to give him the best toys we could- and turned a blind eye to all the bad stuff he did.
    We didn’t learn our lesson from that, either.

  10. jack75287

    jack75287 said, about 2 years ago

    Dude show some respect. I swear I have never seen a Rob Rogers here on uclick before and every time I scope out a few other political cartoons I see you and dtroutma. Stop trolling or at least use some better dialog.

  11. TJ

    TJ said, about 2 years ago

    Meet the new boss, same as the old boss. Sheesh.

  12. ossiningaling

    ossiningaling said, about 2 years ago

    So, will we be attacking an evil despot with chemical weapons or with conventional ones?

  13. motivemagus

    motivemagus said, about 2 years ago

    Making up paranoid fantasies again, eh, Harley?
    WMDs were not found, the ability to produce them was not found. Period.
    The UN did not authorize an invasion; the US and UK decided their invasion was justified by previous UN resolutions.
    In fact, the ONLY nations that agreed with Bush were either paid off or were the UK.
    Stop defending Bush — he’s indefensible.

  14. Phantom Marine

    Phantom Marine said, about 2 years ago


    Right on! You understand the GOP and Tea Party perfectly!

  15. worldisacomic

    worldisacomic said, about 2 years ago

    Now there is the Clark “has no clue” Kent that we all love to dump on! This union shill and liberal hack has know “Clue” when its O’bummer sending us down the same path of war. He has totally bought in to John Scary’s and VP Joe Bidet"s diatribes to push another middle east war. You are all hypocrites!

  16. Load the rest of the comments (1).
Calvin and Hobbes 30th Anniversary