Mike Luckovich

By MB

October 26, 2005 06:53 AM | Link to this

Darn good question Mike. I’d like to know the true answer to that one too. Excellent job and a powerful editorial.

By Mike NotL

October 26, 2005 07:04 AM | Link to this

9/11

By Polk

October 26, 2005 07:14 AM | Link to this

To Mike NotL and everyone else who is either too ignorant or too gullible to believe everything the Republicans say, Iraq and Saddam Hussain had nothing to do with 9/11. *Mike was spot on today. *

By PW

October 26, 2005 07:14 AM | Link to this

Wow. When I turned the page of the paper this morning and saw this cartoon, it hit me hard. Brought tears to my eyes. Excellent question, Mike.

By Russ

October 26, 2005 07:16 AM | Link to this

Why?? Because that’s where the bad guys are. Duh. Would you rather fight them over here? Keep your eye on the ball, Mike.

By Mike Not L

October 26, 2005 07:29 AM | Link to this

Thanks Polk…You cleared that up for me. Since you seem to have first hand knowledge, perhaps you can tell us when and where the next 9/11 (like) attack will occur? If you look a little deeper for my meaning in my comment you will ascertain that it is better to fight “them” there as opposed to here.

By Mark

October 26, 2005 07:31 AM | Link to this

Why? Because freedom is not free. It comes with a heavy price for both us and the Iraqis. Of course the Iraqis passed their constitution yesterday, I guess the AJC decided that was not important enough to cover.

My question to you is how does it feel to be on the wrong side of history? Maybe your cartoons will be the ones in the textbooks that showed just how spineless our media really is.

By G.

October 26, 2005 07:33 AM | Link to this

Mike, that is awesome! So many lies told, so many lives lost.

By JohnnyT

October 26, 2005 07:35 AM | Link to this

I applaud Mike L for being one of the few representatives of the US media who isn’t too lazy or frightened to ask this crucial question. That he asks it so eloquently is something I’ve come to expect from him. As an Atlanta native who moved to the UK the month G Bush the First was elected, I have grown appalled at the cynicism of this maladministration and am thankful when I see evidence that not all journalists have been infected by it. Cheers, Mike. I look forward to seeing your response to the forthcoming indictments!

By leighway

October 26, 2005 07:36 AM | Link to this

Russ- suppose your son or daughter’s name was in Mike’s drawing. Would you have the courage to read the word aloud and think about the question? Truth can be frightening and bitter and it is a frightening, bitter time for many. Stop trying to be right and THINK truthfully for a minute about what is happening in this country.

By Simon

October 26, 2005 07:42 AM | Link to this

Wow, isn’t capitalism great? You can use the names of fallen soldiers and make a buck. Good job.

By Chet Thomas

October 26, 2005 07:44 AM | Link to this

Why? To prevent another 9/11 (no, I do not believe that Saddam was reponsible for 9/11, but given the chance, he would have made an attack of his own). To rid the world of one more despot that had been murdering his own people for decades. Because the sanctions weren’t working (hence the oil-for-food scandal that is brewing right now.) Because Saddam had developed WMDs in the past, had used WMDs on his own people (the Kurds), and the evidence suggested that he was still making them (a conclusion that was/is supported by every intelligence agency on the planet, including Russia, Germany, and France).

By Tom Wesley

October 26, 2005 07:46 AM | Link to this

Mike will never make a great political cartoonist because he is so biased. He is a great liberal, but a sorry political cartoonist. If Mike can’t cast a critical eye on both sides of an issue then he should go to work for the Democratic Party. I am sure that they could use some humor these days. The death toll in Iraq is tragic. No one questions that. Either you agree that we should be over there or you don’t. Either you understand the “why” or you don’t. Mike doesn’t understand it. My experience has been that it is best to avoid subjects that one does not understand.

By Dar

October 26, 2005 07:51 AM | Link to this

So I read these comments and there are a lot of people who say well, we did it cause he would have attacked us or he would have used WMD’s. He would have, I’m telling you he would have! What kind of @#$% is THAT?! Do you attack anyone who MAY or possibly attack you? That is utter and complete nonsense. These people haven’t a brain in their bodies. This war was a travesty and any one on the RIGHT side of history knows that. Awesome and powerful editorial.

By Nathan

October 26, 2005 07:53 AM | Link to this

Why? Is he dense? To show the world that U.N. Resolutions actualy mean something. To show the world’s dictators that they cannot go on endlessly violating resolution after resolution. To actualy verify what Saddam spent 12 years refusing to do.

How about a question for Mike; why spend your time trying to dissolve support for the war while troops boots are on the ground. It disgust me!

Since the inspectors were asked to leave Iraq before Clinton’s Operation Desert Fox in 1998 and did not return until Bush insisted, how can Mike and everyone else be sooooo sure that there were no WMD’s? Hind sight?

How about these questions; How many years should we give the U.N. to do its job? How many resolutions are enough to convince people that Saddam had no intention of complying? Does Mike think that things would have been better if some nation had enforced the Treaty of Versailles. Mike Luckovich, what does your work contribute to society?

By Paula

October 26, 2005 07:54 AM | Link to this

Oh Mike, this is so powerful. I sit here in tears as I write this. You are truly a gifted person, and I am very glad you use your gift wisely.

By William

October 26, 2005 07:58 AM | Link to this

In the case of those who died on 9/11/2001, liberals told us why- We were mean to muslims. Mike didn’t need to ask the question that day.

By E. S. Futrell

October 26, 2005 08:03 AM | Link to this

It is very clear that Mike doesn’t understand that Freedom is “free”, nor does he clearly understand the principles that this country was founded upon. This is very disrespectful to the servicemen and women who are out there at the point protecting the freedoms he and all of us enjoy. We should all know the Why…..

By Rick

October 26, 2005 08:03 AM | Link to this

How about and editorial cartoon showing the twin towers collapsing in the form of “because”. The price of freedom has never been cheap and never will be. Many thousands of men have died to give you the right to publish your cartoons. Cartoons that would have sent you to the concentration camps in Germany or the Gulags in Russia. The death of American Soldiers has paid for your right to free speech. Honor them and thank them.

By John

October 26, 2005 08:06 AM | Link to this

“…how does it feel to be on the wrong side of history?” Seem to me that supporters of the Viet Nam war said the same thing.

By John

October 26, 2005 08:06 AM | Link to this

So your children and your children’s children can live a safe life in a free society. It takes a bit of vision and recognition of harsh reality, but try Mike. History will tell you it was the beginning of a great democratic movement bringing freedom to many people.

By Mike

October 26, 2005 08:08 AM | Link to this

I am a soldier in the Army, currently on my second deployment to Iraq. I feel the loss of our Americans more than any of you who have never served, whether you be a liberal or a conservative. I will tell you this, we are making progress over here. Democracy is starting to take hold and we might be on the verge of ensuring that the Middle East is no longer the most dangerous part of the world. One of the sad truths of the matter is that the American media and public has become some casaulty averse. We are more concerned about the death toll than what is being accomplished on the ground. That is where we are going to lose the war, in the perceptions of everyday Americans. It would be a slap in the face of the 2000 names above to leave the job unfinished. As a soldier I would much rather fight the bad guys on their turf than fight them in Atlanta, Athens, Savannah, or Columbus. While I agree that one death is too many, as a member of the US Army, I find it discouraging to see the names of my fallen comarades used in a political cartoon.

By Que

October 26, 2005 08:09 AM | Link to this

It seems a lot of people here are full of emotion and not to concerned with fact.
Fact: Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Stop using that as an excuse. Fact: France, Germany and Russia also believe that Iraq had WMD, but there soldiers are safe and sound at home not getting blown to bits. Fact: If anyone cared to do the research they would find this administration knew it was very unlikely that Iraq had WMD but wanted to go to war anyway so they misled the public. Fact: George Bush and Tricky Dick Cheney always talking about the public having to sacrifice, yet neither of these individual ever sacrificed a single hair on there head for anything in this country. Lets face it, George joined the guard to avoid Viet Nam and Dick plain said he had other things to do than to serve in our military.
I served 22 years in the military and never had a much disdain for a so called Commander and Chief as I have for this president.

I for one forbade my children from joining the military to serve under this jerk.

And one question for all you who spout that “freedom isn’t free” and “fight them there so we won’t have to here” crap. Just how many deaths are too many for you guys. Do we continue to loose lives in perpetuity or do you have a plan? Use your common sense. This war was a farce and that is all it is to it!

By John

October 26, 2005 08:09 AM | Link to this

“…how does it feel to be on the wrong side of history?” Seem to me that supporters of the Viet Nam war said the same thing.

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 08:14 AM | Link to this

Yeah Lyndon Johnson sure screwed up the Vietnam War, John.

By Mike NotL

October 26, 2005 08:14 AM | Link to this

…soooo.. how long has Mike L. had this on his drawing board waiting for the 2000th? Do you think he has permission from each of the families to USE their loss for his gain?

By Wild Sects

October 26, 2005 08:17 AM | Link to this

So you feel that Lyndon screwed up Viet Nam but Georgie is doing a bang up job? He is doing a bang up job but not in a good way.

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 08:18 AM | Link to this

Good point Mike notL, Lucko doesn’t care about whether the families of these great Americans would want to have their name used in a political cartoon to trash the war they died fighting in. He is more concerned with making his President looked stupid and corrupt

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 08:21 AM | Link to this

Wild Sects, I can admit that their have been mistakes made during this war. Can you admit that President Bush has accomplished some good things since he has been in office? Or are you one of those that believe he does nothing good.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 08:21 AM | Link to this

Some of you people are MORONS (psst. I’m talking to you Mike NotL)! Unless you know any of the names in that drawing or you or anyone you know is serving - just Shut Up!

By steven

October 26, 2005 08:23 AM | Link to this

Wow! And the AJC makes this worthless propaganda available as a download!

The AJC is not a newspaper. It is a liberal activism journal. Maybe that’s why thier circulation drops constantly. The good news is that they will be out of business soon enough. Good riddence to the who dishonest bunch.

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 08:24 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason, I personally know three people in that drawing and I find it appalling that they are being used in a political cartoon by someone openly hostile to the war in order to make a political point. He doesn’t care about their loss only the political gain from it.

By steven

October 26, 2005 08:25 AM | Link to this

Hey Voice of Reason,

Are you on the list? Are you serving? Are you “shutting up”?

Are you a HYPOCRITE? Yes.

By steven

October 26, 2005 08:27 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason,

If you would “SHUT UP” and listen to the folks who server you might learn something.

In the last election, serving soldiers and their families voted for Bush by more than 3:1. Why don’t you “SHUT UP” and think why that might be the case.

By Nathan

October 26, 2005 08:27 AM | Link to this

Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, fine the 9/11 Commission report stated that. You anti war people want to call me ignorant because YOU think that I don’t accept that. Since you all have the “straight dope” on logic and resonable thinking, if we could kill UBL tommorrow would that be your brilliant long term solution to the global problem of terrorism. Wasn’t that called whacking moles and didn’t we do that for some years. Did it work?

Unfortunately the man you all think is soooo stupid is actually more intelligent than you. Does it hurt?

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 08:27 AM | Link to this

Well good for you Ricky, I have 7 close friends in that cartoon, have been there twice, and I know for a fact that 6 of the 2,000 people on that list were asking the SAME question. Your dear President does the same thing when he talks about the “worthy cause” that they died for too. Truth is, most people don’t care about the loss of life unless it personally affects them. People are full of sh*t, and so is your president and his administration.

By bg

October 26, 2005 08:30 AM | Link to this

Mike used their names only AFTER Bush used their lives. Which is worse?

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 08:30 AM | Link to this

Voice of Reason, unless you aren’t a citizen anymore he is your President too. And since the military, espcecially the Army, voted overwhelming in favor of your President, I would say that you are in the minority. I have also served two tours(ground war and Operation IF 2.5) and honestly have not heard many soldiers ask why

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 08:32 AM | Link to this

Hey look the morons are out to play. Yes I served, no I’m not shutting up. Serving soldiers voted for the president because we were in Afghanistan (justifiably), Dumbas* took us to Iraq when he had the support of the military and the American people with his LIES you fools. The military was excited to do our jobs and continue whopping as*. But after we got Saddam, our mission was complete! We didn’t go there to build a nation.

By Brad Clontz

October 26, 2005 08:33 AM | Link to this

This is thoughtful and poignant, and it is disingenuous to say that it is somehow “against the troops.”

The only thing now is not adding to the list.

By Mark Millican

October 26, 2005 08:34 AM | Link to this

2,000 American lives versus thousands upon thousands of Iraqis and Kurds killed by Saddam. Is our imperiousness and racism showing?

By rdd

October 26, 2005 08:37 AM | Link to this

To those who think we went after Suddam to remove a murdering dictator, why aren’t we in Darfur? Is it because there is no oil to be drilled or that the dying’s skin tone is too dark. Mike asked a good question which I hope the ‘Little Man’ answers one day.

By Carl Stone

October 26, 2005 08:38 AM | Link to this

Mike:

GREAT WORK!!!! Maybe, just maybe some of our politicians will eventually get the message and get us out of this stupid war!!!!!!

By Joseph

October 26, 2005 08:38 AM | Link to this

I guess tomorrow you will post the names of the 3,000 people killed on 9/11 in the same manner. I’m not saying that Sadaam had anything to do with 9/11 (noboby knows) but the time had come to draw a line in the sand after years of escalating attacks. IF PRES. BUSH LIED ABOUT WMD THEN SO DID BILL CLINTON, GREAT BRITAIN, FRANCE, AND MANY OTHER COUNTRIES. Pres. Bush takes on the tough issues and doesn’t hide under his desk with interns. By the way, these 2,000 heroes volunteered for duty and should be honored not used as propoganda by a left wing rag.

By Larry

October 26, 2005 08:39 AM | Link to this

Why don’t you boneheads who support the mess the administration has made in Iraq, get your butts over there? I don’t see Bush’s daughter’s or Cheney’s daughter or Bush’s brothers offspring over there. It was entirely over control of the oil. Cheney’s company is screwing us taxpayers out of billions of dollars in Iraq, and now in the hurricane areas. It’s a damn shame some of you are so blind to the true facts. Today we should find out what Cheney & Rove are made of. Hopefully we can see them do THE PERP WALK.

By Mike M.

October 26, 2005 08:40 AM | Link to this

To question why is to seek the fundamental truth. We should always question “Why” on any topic as terrible as war. I happen to believe that this is a just cause we are fighting for in Iraq. That doesn’t mean that I don’t question that logic daily. Those on the right, please don’t be afraid of the question. Those on the left, you seem more interested in bashing the President than in exercising your right of protest. Reasoned dissent is one of the most powerful forces. Irrational slamming makes one look a fool.

By spankmonkey

October 26, 2005 08:40 AM | Link to this

As my younger brother undergoes rehab from a roadside IED outside falujah, I have to ask the same question. You chickenhawks slay me, not one iota of collective sacrifice amongst you, yet you dismiss the death and injury to our soldiers as a necessary evil to allow you the right to drive your Hummer with that yellow ribbon it, when in reality one has little to do with the other.

You can drive that Hummer regardless of whether Saddam is in power or not, and your “sacrifice” of 3 square inches on your bumper is negligible, I know this suprises you because you are so self centered, but sometimes the truth hurts…

By SGTLOWE

October 26, 2005 08:46 AM | Link to this

It is always good to question “why”. It is also important to have the wisdom that once the question has been asked, to be able to see the true answer. Even if it is one that you do not agree with, I am on my second tour in Iraq and have often asked myself why I leave my wife and two young boys half a world away, to come here. I see good reasons in the faces of the children here who have hope. And in the eyes of Iraqi soldiers who are willing to die for a belief in the freedom that they have only just tasted. Winston Churchill once said, “The price of greatness is responsibility”. America is truly a great nation, and there, is the simplest answer to the “why”. As a great nation we have responsibilities. Not only to ourselves but to others, the Iraqi people want to be free. I have seen it with my own eyes. America is doing the right thing. This war may not have stared for the right reasons but we are on the right track. Iraq will be free and history will prove our cause just.

By Jim

October 26, 2005 08:48 AM | Link to this

Why? Because the president rushed to judgement and was never willing to admit he did not have the facts or that because he didn’t have them, he refuses to admit his mistake. Why? because his ego is more important than the truth. He pays via popularity polls; others pay with their lives.

By gttim

October 26, 2005 08:48 AM | Link to this

I think the president is a drug snorting, moronic alcoholic who cannot complete a sentence without a teleprompter. I think he brought us into this war on lies to make profits for thewar machine- defense contractors. I think he has shown that most of the American people are rubes, who cannot weed the good information from the corrupt and conservative owned media. I hope he rots in hell.

I do, however, support our troops and their families. I want the GOP led House and Senate to quit voting down aid to the military and their families. I want the GOP House and Senate to quit voting down more appropriations for our veterans. I want the GOP led House and Senate to quit voting down more appropriations for armor for our soldiers on the ground. I want our soldiers home where they are out of harms way. I only want them deplyed when there is an honest threat to the United States. There was not an honest threat by Iraq.

I want Bin Laden hunted down and punished for his role in 9/11, not wandering around trying to hurt us again, where “W” has left him.

I want a President who cares more about human lives that tax cuts.

I want shared sacrifice, if people are dying the ones staying home should be paying more taxes to support them.

Thank you for a chilling cartoon, Mike. Like your cartoon about 9/11, which many people seem tohave forgotten, you get to the heart of the issue.

By Kay Robinson

October 26, 2005 08:50 AM | Link to this

Some of you people are very hurtful. I plan to keep this drawing and search for my brothers name tonight.

K. McCall, killed in action Nov. 2004.

RIP Big Brother. I love you and miss you very much. I never had the opportunity to prove to you that I could really make a good lasagna.

By NA

October 26, 2005 08:50 AM | Link to this

Mike,

This is an excellent question. Why didn’t we bring to trial and put to death all the american militia members after the Oklahoma City bombings? Those punks put a bomb next to the CHILD CARE CENTER!! That was a direct attack on a government building on US soil. We all know there were more people supporting that attack than the few which were put on trial. Where was the right-wing uproar over those lost lives? Why is it so easy for you to justify attacking and killing people as long as they don’t look like you? Each of you diehard “pro-war” folks need to take an honest look at your reasons for supporting this war. How many Iraqis who have died were members of Al Quaida (sp?) before this war? How many Iraqis are members now? What about Osama - remember him? I think a lot of you were fooled by the Bush administration. Now that it is clear that they lied to us, pride won’t let you admit he played you for a sucker. Bush is a con man. He’s not a Christian. He’s not led by God nor inner demons. He’s led by greed. Two thousand soldiers have died fighting an unjust war. It’s a shame that we have allowed this man to divide and distract our nation. But God can take what Bush meant for evil and use it for good. So, to all the soldiers in Iraq, our prayers are with you and your families. In the long run, I hope Iraq is improved by our intervention. I hope we have not just created a terrorist breeding ground.

By Richard Hamil

October 26, 2005 08:51 AM | Link to this

Hey Mike, read the 911 Commission report, listen to your idol Bill Clinton, and the UN inspectors.But,don’t confuse you with facts. You just hate George Bush and America. Thank God for these men and women who are willing to go to war for their country.If it were left to you, we would be in BIG trouble!

By Chris

October 26, 2005 08:51 AM | Link to this

Listen, you all question Bush and the choice he and his advisors made. Our country is a better place thanks to this 2,000 Americans who gave their lives. When September 11th happened, did you all think they died for nothing? We should all be thankful these servicemen gave the ultimate sacrifice to the one thing they love: THIS NATION!!!

By Mike NotL

October 26, 2005 08:59 AM | Link to this

Thanks to all of you that served as well. I personally know 6 of the 2000 and many others still there. But I will shut-up as requested.

By George P.

October 26, 2005 09:04 AM | Link to this

Why? To save and protect your sorry, ignorant rear end, Mike, and those of your family. Keep up the negative drumbeat. The terrorists just love it! That negativity is the best “aid and comfort” you could possibly offer. If we don’t beat them there, they will use their new base to strengthen, expand, and hit us and all other non-muslims hard. Then millions will die, and all of those will be on YOUR hands. Think about it. (I hate to break it to you, but gays and Jewish people will be the first on their “hit list”) You think they will like you and leave you alone if you support their cause the way you do? Think again.

By Mark

October 26, 2005 09:06 AM | Link to this

Our country is a better place because they gave their lives? In what way? I’d surely like to hear you explain that one. Name one thing that’s better after 9/11. I don’t see anything different from 9/10/2001.

By B. Hoffman

October 26, 2005 09:10 AM | Link to this

The question is why?
The answer is Freedom is not Free. It is has never been Free for the United States and it is not Free for Iraq.

God Bless the men and women who have fought for the United States, from the American Revolution to the present Operation Iraq Freedom.

By eric francis

October 26, 2005 09:13 AM | Link to this

Gee, I did not realize so many ostriches could type.

Or is this comment board dittoheads on parade?

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 09:13 AM | Link to this

Good one George P. “Their new base,” as you put it was created by us. Too funny, way funny. Do you even know the difference between Al Qaeda and what is now called “Al Qaeda in Iraq?”

By Peter May

October 26, 2005 09:20 AM | Link to this

You nailed it. How can we afford to lose so many of our best to accomplish so little? I wonder if this list would be so long if one of the names on it was Bush…

By Tread

October 26, 2005 09:21 AM | Link to this

Good one Mike! I wonder what you’ll have for us when the 3,000th American is lost or for that matter the 5,000th? Because from the sound of some of these comments, we (Americans) think we should “stay the course”, yet we don’t have a clue of what the “course” is. And those of you that believe we’re fighting “them” over there - must not have noticed how porous our borders are - that security “blanket” may not be there in the near future, if we don’t start monitoring OUR borders better than we are. Wake up people, we’re fighting an ugly Religion-based war to get to OIL. Simple as that. GOD BLESS AMERICA and please deliver us from DUBYA!

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 09:23 AM | Link to this

Here is the deal. I have served two tours in Iraq and lost several friends. I don’t care whether or nor you support he war or Bush. That is your right and part of what makes America great is that you can voice your dissent. I am all for that. I agree that we made some mistakes after the ground war. I was THERE to witness it. I am not saying it has been perfect there, but we are making progress. What I object to is using my fallen comrades as a political statement. I think that crosses the line. Us soldiers don’t get to ask why, we go out and do our jobs because that is what we do. Those serving are the best America has to offer. Mourn their loss, absolutely, but don’t use it for political gain. That is all I am asking as a veteran. Is that too much to ask? Am I wrong to ask this?

By Terry

October 26, 2005 09:23 AM | Link to this

It seems that Mr. Luckovich (like most of America) has no idea what terrorism is all about. It’s not because of anything the US did (or didn’t do).

It is telling the Usama never referred to his organization as al Qaeda until after 9/11. His organization has been and still is The World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders.

You should read that title again and make sure you understand it.

The core tenet of the “Religion of Peace� is jihad.

In the Qur’an, it is written that the world is divided into two sections; dal ar-Islam, the home of Islam, and dal ar-harb, the home of war (non-believers), and that this division would last until all non-believers were forced to submit to Islamic law or were killed – this is jihad. The word jihad doesn’t mean ‘Holy War’, it’s more like an Islamic Manifest Destiny.

For a Christian, the only way to guarantee eternal salvation is to accept Jesus as the savior. For a Muslim, the only way to guarantee eternal salvation is to die fighting non-believers. Jihad is as important to Muslim faith as Christ is to a Christian.

Why else would the Islamic world cheer and dance in the streets when a young Muslim dies killing women and children of non-believers. They know that the killer has assured his place in Heaven.

All Muslims must fight non-believers (and that includes Jews and Christians). But only those that die in this fight are guaranteed salvation.

Like it or not, this is the enemy. (If you don’t believe me, do your own research…but be thorough, don’t just rely on one or two sources.)

Any peace accord with this mentality would be as fleeting as Palestine/Israel relations. And anybody preaching tolerance doesn’t understand the problem.

By Jon

October 26, 2005 09:24 AM | Link to this

What you liberals just can’t seem to understand is that this invasion had little to do with 9/11 itself. This was about our future protection, providing freedom to millions of oppressed Iraqis, updholding UN laws!!! Something Slick Willy didn’t have the courage to fight for. Stop whining that you were “lied to”. Boo-hoo. Guess what? More Americans will die for us. What is sad is that this statistic is all over the front page, yet I see hardly a mention of the Iranian President’s recent comments against Israel. That’s right. Check it out if your lucky enough to find it. Mike Lukoloser doesn’t deserve to have a job selling hot dogs on the streets.

By Nathan

October 26, 2005 09:24 AM | Link to this

Well it is becoming more and more obvious that some people just have no problem with Saddam not living up to the 1991 cease fire agreement, by meeting HIS burden of proof to disclose the wherabouts of the WMD’s,which we provided him while he was fighting the Ayatollah Khomeini. They would prefer that we bury our heads in the sand and wait for the threat to become imminent so we could lose tens of thousands of lives. The narrow minded and short sighted attitude of the populace will destroy us like Rome. America, land of the fat, dumb and happy?

Maybe a higher power did send Reagan and Bush 43 to preserve this land, because the Dems have done little to nothing.

By Gil Gibson

October 26, 2005 09:31 AM | Link to this

The left could hardly wait for the 2000th soldier to die in Iraq. What a great opportunity to undermine the war effort, dishonor those who died and those who still serve and bash the President. Their glee can hardly be disguised.

By Anne

October 26, 2005 09:32 AM | Link to this

I look forward to your editorial cartoons every day. This one gave me quite a jolt this morning. Thank you for taking a stand against this awful war and remembering the men and women who have given their lives.

By Andy

October 26, 2005 09:34 AM | Link to this

Mike M, you’re right… To question why is to seek the fundamental truth. What I don’t see is the right wing of this country owning up to the fundamental truth that power and arrogance has totally corrupted the administration and the leaders of Congress.
Why, because there were profits to be made. Why, because they’d planned it all out in advance. Why, because war and chaos pay more than peace. Why, because they had the perfect shill to lead the effort. It’s all falling apart though, because the leaders were too arrogant and self-centered to see that it’s not about the excuses and lies that they used to get us into this war, it’s about them holding on to power and it’s about them getting richer.
Would you let your child lie to you and if it caused a single death, would you still accept the lie as truth?
2000 and counting. I don’t accept the lies.

By Mike

October 26, 2005 09:35 AM | Link to this

I liked the cartoon. It is always interesting to read other opinions that are contrary to your own. They seem to have all the answers while sitting here at home. While my nephew 23 yrs old starts his second tour in Iraq, its amazing to see so many cheer standing on the side as always.

By Que

October 26, 2005 09:36 AM | Link to this

Terry, you are telling people to research. You need to do more research yourself. I am a muslim and proud of it. I also have spent a full career in the U.S. Military, not Al Qaeda. How many years of military service have you given. I was wounded it the first gulf war fighting for this country.
Its people like you that perpetrate the misconception about what Islam is all about. I won’t sit here and argue the Quran with you because you obviously took a single passage and made a meal out of it. I’d suggest to you to stop being an idiot and read the whole Quran and not selectively reading parts that might support your one track mind.

By Richard

October 26, 2005 09:37 AM | Link to this

Nice support for the artist. “Sure, we’ll post his little anti-war picture but ‘instant focus group’ the guy on the very next line.

(Do you like Mike? check this box)

Do you do that with the Op-Ed pieces? What about the guy who writes the Sports? There’s opinion there.

The media used to help open the eyes of the people. Now, it’s asking permission.

By Stan

October 26, 2005 09:38 AM | Link to this

I can answer: Because the war is the right thing to do. Our soldiers believe it with enough conviction to risk their lives. They’re not victims, quit treating them like they are.

Who are you to question the value of their life, you low-life????

By Peter C.

October 26, 2005 09:42 AM | Link to this

Mike Luckovich poses a question that is on the minds of the majority of Americans both conservative and liberal. The simple answer is the politics of oil. The US has for the first time in recent history started a war rather than reacting to an attack on our homeland. Those who favour Bush suggest thatwe proactively went after Saddam Husein because he had the means (ie WMD’s) to attack our interests Lets face it what are our interests in the middle east? The answer if we want to be brutally honest Oil! The propaganda eminating out of the White House not withstanding, we did not go there to bring democracy and nation build, we went there to protect a vital supply of oil on which this country has become so dependent. For this we went to war with the subsequent death toll and for no other reason.

By Young

October 26, 2005 09:43 AM | Link to this

I reiterate: the people on the plane on 9/11 were Saudi. Take the war there where the people who actually died and killed our people live. Or would that hurt Bush relations with the Saudis?

Take the war to Afghanistan or Iran. That war would be justified. I honor my troops and support them. But talking against the war does not make me not support them. I respect what they do and their lives on the line. But if we go to war, take it to the people that started the war. Don’t deviate and go to the right. Stay on course.

By Ira

October 26, 2005 09:47 AM | Link to this

Mike - I used to think you were above the liberal, hate-baiting attitude of the AJC. This is even more reason I will not pay for this “rag” in print.

By hewhoasks

October 26, 2005 09:50 AM | Link to this

That had to be a lot of work.

Thanks.

By David

October 26, 2005 09:52 AM | Link to this

By Terry

October 26, 2005 09:52 AM | Link to this

Que: Thank you for a response. I am a military person (circa Viet Name era) and have done a lot of study. But, admittedly, I am looking at it from the outside with a western view of the world.

So, please explain jihad and the significance it has to Islam?

And, could you also explain the celebrations that occur after a sucessful terrorist event? Or why 80% of the Muslims in England would not condemn the London bombings?

I might sound biased, but I am at least studying and trying to learn.

By Ira

October 26, 2005 09:53 AM | Link to this

To Peter C.:

You are an idoiot!

By Bud

October 26, 2005 09:54 AM | Link to this

Young, We are taking the war to those who attacked us. The terrorist on those planes may have been Saudi born, but they were lead by a terrorist organization harbored by the Taliban. There were and are terrorist in IRAQ. Zaquari was there BEFORE we went in along with the terrorist who hijacked the Italian cruse ship years ago. Saddam harbored terrorist. He was also in persuit of weapons. Let’s face it, he wasn’t defrauding weapons inspectors due to pride. Though the media hides this, British intelligence stands by the claim that IRAQ was trying to acquire uranium from Niger. Hmmm…let’s see, what does a state, harboring terrorist, want to do with uranium? I’m sure they just wanted to make nuclear power. After all, Saddam was a nice guy, right? Further, you on the left seem to believe Bush should have done more to prevent 9/11 with less conclusive information. You need to remember that terrorist play a propaganda game too. They know that those bleeding hearts in the media cave to deaths. So they don’t have to beat us on the battlefield, only in our own newspapers. After all, blood sells more papers than rebuilding schools and restoring power, or reporting facts.

By JAS

October 26, 2005 10:00 AM | Link to this

It takes courage to value life over fear. It takes courage when you have been soundly proven wrong to then correct the mistake. It takes courage to have vision and stop making thousands of little Sadams that our children will have to deal with when we are gone.

Whether there are just things being done in Iraq or not is NOT the FIRST question. We are fighting an illicit war and all the world and nearly half of this country knows it. No matter that we are a powerful nation. The powerful must still lead with dignity, truth, grace and courage in order to be respected and followed.

By David Raiteri

October 26, 2005 10:03 AM | Link to this

I would try to explain the WHY to Mike & all his liberal comrads. But since Rush Limbaugh, Neal Boortz & Sean Hannity combined haven’t had much success with using logic on liberals, I will not even try.

By arman

October 26, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this

Mike’s cartoon, in my opinion, is great. It has stimulated the debate that we are having right now. Like it or not. Left or Right. I agree with one of the earlier posters. Spouting hate etc at someone you don’t agree with just makes you sound stupid. Let’s ask why. We deserve that much. Those who have lost their lives deserve that much. It doesn’t matter id they volunteered or not. If I were one of those 2,000, I would want my friends and family to do the same, and I would think that they would deserve some answers.

Personally, I believe that we made a big mistake by jumping into the middle east the way that we did. People here don’t understand the cultural dynamics of the region. S** and Sunnis. Bathist. Iranians. Saudis. Kurds. Afghanis. Etc. As much as I want to believe that we are doing a good thing over there, my intuition won’t let me believe that. It’s not like liberating Japan in 1945. We basically dismantled a sovereign nation, and are trying to rebuild it from the ground up, and basing it on our idea of “freedom”. It sounds great on paper, and I’m sure it used to make Mr. Cheney all warm inside thinking about it, but it just doesn’t work that way.

The Iraqis wanted to believe that are intentions were pure. Most muslims were already skeptical in 2003. Then we invade, topple a terrible dictator (which was good, nobody can deny that in itself), but don’t even try to secure their national treasures (such as museums and historic cultural sites)while, at the same time, we go out of our way to police and secure the Oil Ministry. Bad start. Then we get done “liberating”. But wait, there’s an insurgency. OOh, didn’t plan for that. Yikes.

I don’t want to compare Iraq to Vietnam, but there are glaring parallels. I just don’t understand how we could not have anticipated some of the things that we experienced in the 60s over there. Oh wait, nobody in the administration spent any time over there. Anyways, are mission was essentially the same, except we were fighting a much more well equipped foe. However, we were faced with the same ills there: gorilla tactics etc, while fighting for the hearts and minds of the people. I don’t know. It’s all pretty overwhelming when you think about it. Our troops deserve all the credit in the world. They have been put in a terribly hostile situation, with no direction from our administration.

I’ve rambled. I have to thank Mike for making me think and asking myself “why”. It is not too much to ask that question of our leaders. It doesn’t make one traitorous or undeserving or the wonderful freedoms that we have here at home. An earlier poster questioned another’s fundamental understanding of our country’s founding simply b/c he followed Mike’s lead, and asked “why”. To that, I would respond to the later poster with a couple of quotes:

“How fortunate for governments that men do not think.” — Adolf Hitler

“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country.” — President Theodore Roosevelt, 1908

“It is not the right of the people to question the government. It is their responsibility.� -Thomas Jefferson

THIS IS MY FAVORITE ONE:

“Why, of course, the people don’t want war. Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship… voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country.” - Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials

By Mark

October 26, 2005 10:05 AM | Link to this

WHY?

Beacause Chimpy Mcflightsuit is an idiot.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 10:06 AM | Link to this

David - Very impressive list of fools you present us with. Well, Hannity is TOO bad.

By RLB

October 26, 2005 10:07 AM | Link to this

How soon we forget!! All you liberals and anti-war weenies had better wake up! The terrorists have not hit us since 911. Why do you think that is? Answer: The brave men and women of the US ARMED Forces. Yes its very sad they died but there isn’t a more noble cause! God Bless America and President Bush. How about supporting America for a change?????

By Huss

October 26, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this

I understand now killing brings peace! its too bad no one came to help the slaves that builtthis country for 400 years!!.P.S. that wrong was never put right. maybe they should jusst have killed all of there massas for there freedom!! Lets make iraq like America where every thing is just peachy!!! Thanks for the insight yall I understand now!!!

By Michael H.

October 26, 2005 10:11 AM | Link to this

There were no connections between al Qaeda and the Saddam regime and according to the findings of the Duefler report there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Despite being told three times not to use the claim that Iraq attempted to buy uranium yellowcake from Niger the administration chose to leave it in the 2003 State of the Union speech and have other members of the administration repeat it. After the war was over they conceded that the documents were forgeries.

Perhaps the key to the “why” question lies in the remarks of Paul Wolfowitz who in March, 2003 told an interviewer for “reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy, we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on: weapons of mass destruction.” When asked a month later why a nuclear power such as North Korea was being treated differently from Iraq, where there were in fact no weapons of mass destruction, Wolfowitz minced no words. “Let’s look at it simply. The most important difference between North Korea and Iraq is that economically, we just had no choice in Iraq. The country swims on a sea of oil.”

It’s a bit difficult to run the stock “liberal bias” line in the face of such documented candor from one the main policy makers behind this fiasco of a policy.

“W” has single handedly taken the good will that came from all corners of the globe after the September 11 attacks and squandered it in an unjustified war in Iraq. He has alienated our allies, angered the Islamic world only fomenting more terrorism, failed to capture bin Laden, had 2000 of our solidiers killed, and at least 30,000 Iraqis. This is what the world has to deal with because of the election of a faux cowboy, manifestly incompetent political illiterate. And all the huffing and puffing from the empty headed blowhards of the right, the Limbaughs, Boortz buttheads, Hannity’s and O’Reilly’s, their fans and those with the “W”s on their windshields cannot refute the truth.

By Mark

October 26, 2005 10:11 AM | Link to this

WHY?

Because Chimpy Mcflightsuit is an idiot.

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 10:11 AM | Link to this

Hey, keep up the name calling Mark, you are just continuing to help Republicans win elections. Thanks for you contribution

By BobR

October 26, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

The answer to “Why” has been available since before the first soldier died - PNAC wants to control the Middle East so that they can control the oil. It is a shame the media has been so cowardly the last 3 years, and has coddled Bush instead of reporting the stories that show the Bush crime family for what it is. They are finally getting some cahonas, and actually questioning Bush, so maybe the American people will finally begin to understand the REAL reason “why”…

By NAMVET

October 26, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

I’m with you all the way, Mike!

By Katie , Atlanta. GA

October 26, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

To all the families whom has lost a loved one, I would like to say that you are all in my prayers. As for the war, I do not support it, but I do support the troops, and I think we should pull out of Iraq. This country has actually made Iraq a haven for terrorist. I feel sorry for the children and women there, because they are victims to , and the individuals whom are being killed over there is someones son or daughter as well. A good point was made concerning the Bush administration, I do not see where any of their children in in the war, so I think they should make sacrifices as well, because they are americans to. Freedom is free , there is not price. Jesus payed the price on calvary 3000 years ago. So please stop using this as an excuse. If the United States would stop antonizing other countries and insulting them, and try to work peacefully without the arrogance attitude, then we wouldn’t have to fight. If we really went over to Iraq to remove Saddam Hussein out of power, then we have accomplished the mission, so “WHY” are we still there. I think it is a good question, and don’t say because of terrorist because we have some of those in our own country. Timothy McVay etc…..

By LEN

October 26, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

Mike boils issues down to the bone and exposes the skeleton in the closet. Yes the war may be right, it may be part of a plan to move the violence away from here. Fact is, it was never about weapons of mass destruction or routing out 9/11 terrorists. This war was started on a lie. The W folks don’t seem to mind being lied to or perhaps they are all in on the lie…either way the new presidential monogram is…WHY.

By kimberly

October 26, 2005 10:15 AM | Link to this

RLB, I have another theory as to why the terrorists have not hit us HERE since 2004: Bush told his long-time buddy Osama to stand down while he rapes the Iraqi sand for its oil and empties the US treasury into the pockets of his friends. Every time things look bad for Bush here, “al Quaida” blows up something somewhere else so we’ll all be AFRAID again. Why not ask WHY Osama is still living peacefully and well and unhindered by the wheels of justice? Why indeed!

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 10:16 AM | Link to this

hey RLB, I know a few recruiters! Why would terrorist waste their money trying to attack us here, when they are embarrassing us over there.

It’s kind like having a cat. Cat’s by nature are hunters. If you don’t feed them, they will go out and hunt food. But if you have the kitty chow in the bowl, why would they leave the house.

By ernie

October 26, 2005 10:19 AM | Link to this

Thanks Mike There is a political statment on a long black wall to.It was the same then. It is the same now!

By John W.

October 26, 2005 10:19 AM | Link to this

I am sick of Luckovich always bashing President Bush and our country. If you hate America so much why don’t you leave?? I will personally pay for your one-way ticket. George Bush is not perfect but he is far better than Kerry would ever come close to being. Or maybe you just miss Bill Clinton. Don’t worry Mikey.Hillary is just around the corner…you will be out of a job then. ( Thank God ) How about supporting America and our President for ONCE???

By bev

October 26, 2005 10:20 AM | Link to this

Why??? The answer is in the Holy Bible, read it! Read the Books of Isaiah, Daniel and Revelations. You’ll find your answer. Want to know what is going to happen in the future? Read the Holy Bible. Daniel 11:26… for what has been determined must come to pass! AND IT IS!

By Richard A. Line

October 26, 2005 10:22 AM | Link to this

It is sad that anyone has to die for any cause but if they do, it would be helpful if there was reference to other deaths, such as the 10 million children that die each year from preventable deseases(referred to in the same AJC issue) or how does the number compare to murders in the US or total miltary deaths outside of Iraq or etc?

By C Daddy

October 26, 2005 10:22 AM | Link to this

Why all the dead from the Embassy bombings in Africa, on board the Cole, in and around the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, in a field in Pennsylvania? How many people died on September 11, in the space of two hours? Freedom has never been, nor will it be, free.

By David

October 26, 2005 10:23 AM | Link to this

Thank you, Mike, for your courage in the face of dumbfounding ignorance of Atlanta readers. Rather than admit error in supporting an illegal war and re-electing the worst president in the past 50 years, they will supplant excuses (not based on real events) for this war. Fact: Saddam Hussein had no WMDs. Ask Scott Ritter, a real American hero. Fact: Hussein and Al Qaeda were not connected. Fact: There never was a plan to secure nuclear materials from Africa. Fact: Cheney drew plans for Iraqi occupation while GHW Bush was president. Fact: GW Bush and his co-criminals planned to go into Iraq prior to 9/11 and used 9/11 as an excuse, using American fear for their own purposes. Fact: There are now more terrorist threats than before the Iraqi invasion.
My opinion: Bush supporters are the most ignorant people in this country. Why? Because they let propaganda influence them against real veterans: Kerry, McCain, and Max Cleland. Because in the face of overwhelming evidence against the war, they still supported going in. And now with people still dying, they refuse to examine the faulty reasoning that led to this war in the first place.

By Mike

October 26, 2005 10:23 AM | Link to this

Andy:

“…Why, because they’d planned it all out in advance…

Out of one side of your mouth you are saying that the current administration is full of ne’er do-wells and fools. And yet you claim that they are capable of planning and executing madness across the middle east in order to profit from it. That response is not a reasoned one. That is an example of falling prey to every sound bite that has ever been uttered opposed to the Iraq conflict.

Can you honestly, in good conscience, tell me that the Bush administration created Middle Eastern animosity & hostility towards the west, got nearly all 100 senators (of all political stripes)to vote for the use of force, invaded a nation that is now in the fetal stages of a legitimate democracy in the long forsaken land of the middle east, only to profit from oil?

An argument such as yours cannot be defended or argued against simply because it is merely conjecture and hyperbole.

By Billy

October 26, 2005 10:25 AM | Link to this

Funny, it seems everyone’s answer falls into one of the Bush administration’s myriad reasons for going to war. 9/11, Freedom isn’t free, Fight them there so we don’t have to here…

How about some originality instead of the usual Republican talking points

By RLB

October 26, 2005 10:26 AM | Link to this

Kimberly and Voice of Reason…you both are obviously drinking from the same pitcher of Liberal flavored Kool-Aid. How ignorant you sound…yes its true…we went to Iraq to get their oil. Damn..how did you Einsteins figure that out? Understand this..Islamic Terrorists HATE America! They want to destroy America including you, your children, your parents, Christians, Jews, etc. Think for yourself once. President Bush made a very tough decision but it was the right decision. He was not preoccupied getting hummers in the Oval Office like your lovely Bill Clinton was.

By S

October 26, 2005 10:27 AM | Link to this

Aside from “WHY?”, here’s a question I think few to no people have pondered, much less answered: “WHAT?” What happens when the mission in Iraq is over? Best case scenario: Iraq becomes a stable, self sufficient democracy and our troops come home. Then what? Is the War on Terror over? Have the terrorist that were responsible for 9/11 been captured and brought to justice? The answer is an unequivoval “NO”. Even if there is a satisfactory end to Gulf War II, we are still no closer to accomplishing that goal than we were on September 12, 2001 are we not? When one gets a grasp on that fact, I feel that one can’t help but conclude that the war in Iraq is nothing more than a catastrophic and tragic diversion. In short, whenever this conflict ends, our main objective has not even come close to being satisfied.

“Why?” indeed!

By Keith FitzPatrick

October 26, 2005 10:27 AM | Link to this

Mike’s cartoon adds nothing of substance to the discussion of the war in Iraq. It doesn’t matter whether or not it was a mistake to go into Iraq in the first place, but the consequences of failure their do matter. And to add a little perspective to the discussion of casualties in Iraq, we’ve lost 2000 service members in 2 ½ years in Iraq. On June 6th, 1944, alone, we lost 2393 American service members.

By L.D.

October 26, 2005 10:29 AM | Link to this

Why bother to ask why? One side’s been trying to explain the answer, and the other side doesn’t care to hear it. Those that understand do, and those that don’t draw biased editorial cartoons.

By John W.

October 26, 2005 10:31 AM | Link to this

Hey David…how can you say that George Bush is the worst President in the past 50 years? You must have been in a medically induced coma ( paid for by the government no doubt ) during Jimmy Carter’s term. Carter was, without doubt, the worst of the bunch. He is a great humanitarian now. Get off George Bush’s back. How do you find your way to work every day..of course I am assuming you actually have a job and are a PRODUCTIVE memembr of society unlike most of your liberal ilk.

By Beth

October 26, 2005 10:31 AM | Link to this

Isn’t it sad that in our country today, simply asking the question “why?” gets you attacked as being unpatriotic or hate-filled. Thank you, Mike Luckovich, for taking the time to remember the unfortunate victims of this administration’s lust for money and global domination.

By Bill G.

October 26, 2005 10:36 AM | Link to this

You go, Mike!! That’s one of the best political cartoons(?) I’ve ever seen. You’re a genius……

By The Man

October 26, 2005 10:36 AM | Link to this

This is response is for those that say why I say why not! When we had slaves for 400 years no one said a peep and they built a heck of country!(And its not like we didn’t know right from wrong back then!) Now we rush to help others get “freedom” Since when do we care how they live they been living like that for hundreds of years and no one gave a hoot as long as the oil was flowing! Left wing, Right wing, chicken wing as long as we all know we don’t give a crap unless its Money at stake. Heck Africa is going through Genocide Right now and not 1 solider will set foot there if there’s nothing for us to gain! Thanks for fighting for my freedom cause that saddam was trying to take it away and make a slave out of me!! I think we shouldn’t stop in Iraq we should go country by country and make them all look like America! Mc Donald’s,Walmarts and greedy corporations!! I fell all warm and toasty knowing someone gave there life so I can cruise around town in my Hummer!!

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this

RLB, RLB - You assuming that I am a liberal is about as wrong as your assumption about Islamists. Did you know that Saddam Hussein was secular. That his and Al Qaeda beliefs and goals were different? Of course not because Rush didn’t tell you that.

Islamists hate the Jews far more than they hate us. They hate us for meddling, which seems to be the only thing our government is proficient at. They are not huge fans of Christians or the West, but they wouldn’t give a rats butt about us if we didn’t impose on their way of life.

Since you brought up the Hummer, I will remind you that Clinton’s b***** didn’t cost 2,000 lives and billions of dollars.

By RDB

October 26, 2005 10:38 AM | Link to this

I am a happy and willing member of the military and I a do not support the military action in Iraq. The one in Afghanistan I do! We had a purpose and world support. With Iraq, we had no purpose at all. Yes Saddam was crazy but not stupid. He knew that he was only President because the UN was afraid of his replacements and the instability in the Middle East. All in all I voted for the Democrat. Not because I am a Democrat, but because I didn’t like the latter. Neither one I thought would do the job correct. And for those that don’t understand. There is a understanding in the military that Republicans pay the military and the Democrat cut back. {which is true)The military is full of poor and underprivilege kids that believe that this is there only way out. Don’t believe me. Ask one. The minority are out to prove something to there middle class parents or other reasons. I only hope that those men and women that died are blessed and go off to there respective Heavens with Honor!

By James

October 26, 2005 10:38 AM | Link to this

Mike does not know why, you don’t know why, I don’t know why. There’s 2,000 reasons why, more than likely 2,000 different reasons why. Why do some of you care if it’s not your friend or family? Do you really care, or is this juat another opportunity to afford you a reason to rip at your President? Mike does this for a living, it’s his livlihood. Question yourself why.

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 10:39 AM | Link to this

This is from Katie’s post: “If the United States would stop antonizing other countries and insulting them, and try to work peacefully without the arrogance attitude, then we wouldn’t have to fight.” I love the blame America first philosophy. It is our fault that people decided to fly a plane into buildings and kill civilians. America is such a bad place isn’t it Katie?

By David

October 26, 2005 10:40 AM | Link to this

Hey, John W., I drive a car that gets 40 miles a gallon. What do you drive? I served in Desert Storm? You serve at all? I doubt it. You’re a chickenhawk like all the others. I know the costs of war. I’ve seen two of my unit in caskets. What have you done in service of your country?

At least Carter told the people the truth, that there is a malaise, that they do need to conserve. If we had followed his route, 2000 soldiers would be alive today, because we wouldn’t be dependent on foreign oil. Bush lies every time he opens his mouth.

By Tre

October 26, 2005 10:43 AM | Link to this

Why? I think it revolves around ridding the world of one corrupt dictator, but Bush misled the nation with the WMD story. The U.S. has a far greater threat of WMD in Kim Jong II than Sadam Hussein. North Korea has openly admitted to their nuclear program, but Bush is reluctant to take Jong to task like Hussein.

It is hard to admit it but Bush should not be the person in charge of the States.

9/11 and homeland security somehow was incorrectly mixed in with the justification for war, but I think the whole thing revolves around Hussein. It was not worth going after Hussein given the eminent threat posed by the leaders of the “Axis of Evil”

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 10:46 AM | Link to this

Hey David, are you open to drilling in ANWAR so we can become less dependent on foreign oil? Or are you one of those that wants it both ways, less dependence on foreign oil, but no drilling in ANWAR

By John W.

October 26, 2005 10:48 AM | Link to this

David?? Earth to David..come in please! What does it matter what kind of car anyone drives you IDIOT. I got news for you..I walk to work, so stick that in your tail pipe. I tried to enlist in the Army but I have a bad back. If I could be there now, I would be. Have you ever heard of Adolph Hitler? Other countries tried to appease him and see what happened. 6,000,000 dead Jews..thats what happened. Lets bring all our troops home and hope the Islamic Terrorists will leave us alone. Brilliant thinking BOZO.

By Mardi

October 26, 2005 10:48 AM | Link to this

Having to ask should be an inkling that one lacks the IQ to understand. (Actually, those with IQs below 150 would be wise to refrain from contributing their opinions to the public discourse anyway. Imagine!)

Those who do understand are pursuing the best course of action for the circumstances, the needs of the many outweighing obfuscations by the few.

You received no invitation to the true roundtable of discussion and knowledge because of the need to avoid dealing with the third-grade mentality: they’re convinced they’re on the same plane as adults, and no technique has been discovered to prove to them that their reality isn’t real, thus it’s a waste of time and resources to try to teach what cannot be learned.

If you lack the talent to be part of the solution, you can go back to doodling under the guise of making a legitimate contribution to the betterment of society. The real Atlases among us continue to shoulder on.

By Brenda

October 26, 2005 10:51 AM | Link to this

Wrong to use the soldiers as a political statement? Gimme a break! Bush and crew have used our soldiers for their political gain since this mess in Iraq began. What better proof of this than the recent scripted interaction between Bush and selected soldiers. Thank goodness our freedom of speech allows folks like Mike to bring the sad facts of 2000 lost lives to the forefront in such a moving way! Excellent job!

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 10:52 AM | Link to this

Keep shouldering on Mardi and keep up the elitist atitude. The rest of us are laughing at you

By kimberly

October 26, 2005 10:54 AM | Link to this

James, I care because it’s being done in MY name. And it’s sucking our economy into insurmountable debt that will affect my children and the American they raise their children in. And because it hasn’t avenged the attacks on our homeland, nor solved a single problem, but has caused many more. And because the wives and parents and sisters and kids and loved ones of all those 2000 deserve BETTER… in our name.

By David

October 26, 2005 10:57 AM | Link to this

Ok, John W., and everyone else who excuses overconsumption as being our “right” to go in and invade other countries, support dictators, as the Bush family did work with Germany (since you brought it up, John) during WWII. I support alternative fuels and mass transportation. When I lived in Germany, I didn’t need a car. In Atlanta, I cannot commute to my job without one, because, and I say this as an Atlanta native, this metro area has been victim of the worst planning of any place on the east coast.

Sorry about your “bad back”, Mr.Boortz.

By Michael H.

October 26, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this

Wow. You’d think that the “Voice of Reason” could spell. Apparently, they attended the same school as our president. Come on, how many lies, how much environmental damage, how many incompetent buddies put in office, and how many tax breaks for the rich, does it take? Why? Why even try to reason with people who are so filled with hate that they can’t reason at all?

By Jesus

October 26, 2005 11:01 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH BUSH NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By Rick J

October 26, 2005 11:03 AM | Link to this

WHY? This is the correct question. WHY did 2000 Americans have to die? Not to mention the thousand of innocent Iraqi’s. I am so sick of these so called Christians being Christians only when it fits their opinions. WWJD? Jesus would not want us to go to war for any reason what so ever! Have you ever heard of “Thou shalt not kill”? “Love One Another”? War is wrong, Bush is wrong and if that makes me a bleeding heart, commie, pinko f*, Liberal then I proudly wear that label. I love this country I just think our president is so out of touch with the true meaning of being a Christian!

By kimberly

October 26, 2005 11:06 AM | Link to this

Thank you Rick J. You’re not alone in that sentiment.

By fred

October 26, 2005 11:08 AM | Link to this

The truth hurts. Attaboy Mike. Worthy of a Pulitzer

By Mike

October 26, 2005 11:12 AM | Link to this

Excellent work Mike.
I haven’t heard a good answer yet, especially the “we’re fighting them over there so we don’t have to fight them here” excuse.
Terrorists aren’t an organized military organization that can be engaged on a battlefield in a specific location. Just because suicide bombers are taking lives in Fallujah doesn’t mean there aren’t compadres planning on taking lives here.

By Matt

October 26, 2005 11:13 AM | Link to this

Rick J, is all war wrong? Was it wrong in WW II or during the Civil War? That is the claim you make and since you infer that Pres Bush is out of touch with Christianity wouldn’t you be too since you wouldn’t want an evil person like Hitler defeated or the evil practice of slavery stopped

By Randy

October 26, 2005 11:15 AM | Link to this

WHY? Mike so that you can continue to ask the question, why? That’s why.

By John W.

October 26, 2005 11:19 AM | Link to this

Hey Jesus…I am assuming by your name you are either “Christ” or an illegal alien. Stepping out on a limb, I am going to go with illegal alien. You obviously do not understand anything about the impeachment process..imagine that?? Of course you could look under impeachment in the dictionary and you will find a picture of Bill Clinton. Since you took the trouble to sneak into our country why don’t you at least study our history and some world history. No President goes to war just because he is bored and needs to look important. Freedom and Liberty are worth fighting for. And do NOT think for a minute that the Muslim Terrorists do not want all AMERICANS dead..even you illegal Mexi-Americans.

By Randy

October 26, 2005 11:19 AM | Link to this

WHY? So that you can continue to write freely and ask questions. That’s why, Mike.

By Billy

October 26, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this

“By Mardi October 26, 2005 10:48 AM Having to ask should be an inkling that one lacks the IQ to understand. (Actually, those with IQs below 150 would be wise to refrain from contributing their opinions to the public discourse anyway. Imagine!)”

MArdi, that would eliminate 99% of the population, which I would be against, but the President would easily fall into that 99%, so let’s go with that idea.

By Que

October 26, 2005 11:25 AM | Link to this

Terry, first let me apologize for calling you an idiot. I don’t know you and basically got angry from reading some of the comments here. Something I usually take with a grain of salt.

Never-the-less, it would take up to much space here to explain the meaning of jihad. What I will say is in Islam, jihad has many implications. You were correct in your assessment that it means world dominance in one respect. I want to say that less than one percent of all muslims worldwide take this view of what jihad really means. And yes, those are the terrorist.

However, any thinking person should realize that this world dominance will never happen, just like us trying to spread domocracy worldwide will never happen either. In any event I applaud you for at least trying to learn things for yourself and not take the overly simplistic point of view.

By RLB

October 26, 2005 11:28 AM | Link to this

Kimberly…thanks for making us all realize that its really all about YOU and YOUR KIDS and their kids.. so on and so on. Was it worth the Colonial Americans fighting for independence from the British? Were we right for fighting Hitler in WW11? Perhaps you and your kids would be all speaking the Queens English or German had our forefathers been a bunch of cowards afraid to stand up for whats right? I bet you drive a big SUV with a magnetic soccer ball on it correct? Are you teaching your kids to hate George Bush just like mommy?? How pathetic..

By HG

October 26, 2005 11:36 AM | Link to this

A brilliant image, Mike. Simply brilliant. Thanks.

By David

October 26, 2005 11:37 AM | Link to this

Why? Your kidding right. WHY do you choose to ignore the thousands, or tens of thousands of Iraqis that disappeared and were killed during Saddam’s regime. WHY do you choose to forget the thousands of Kuwaitis that were killed by Saddam. WHY do you choose to forget and ignore 9/11. WHY do you choose to forget that Saddam placed a bounty on Christians and Jews by offering a reward to the families of suicide bombers. WHY do you choose to ignore the progress that has been made in Iraq, as well as other formerly hostile countries like Lybia, Iran and even Korea.

WHY? because Bush and the war is an easy target people who don’t have the intelligence to think for themselves and let the Liberals do their thinking for them. So go ahead Mike, draw your funny little cartoons while real people who think for themselves fight and die trying to protect your right to do so. You’re a real class act…

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 11:40 AM | Link to this

“Wow. You’d think that the “Voice of Reasonâ€? could spell”

How clever of you Michael H.! You can’t grip anything I say, so naturally you grip the mispellings. Should we get a “Spell Check” blog to make you happy.

Stick to the science and religious garbage that you tend to rant about.

By kimberly

October 26, 2005 11:40 AM | Link to this

RLB, James asked why we care. How nice of you to make this about YOUR hatred instead. Excuse me while I step aside and let YOU implode.

By Young

October 26, 2005 11:46 AM | Link to this

The people you listed David tell you exactly what you want to hear for ratings. They don’t dare go against their fanbase by accurately having an honest discussion of things.

By John Elester

October 26, 2005 11:48 AM | Link to this

Someone phoned this morning to tell me about this cartoon in the AJC. As a family member of one of the fallen listed I am outraged. Outraged enough to contact an attorney and other’s who have names of their departed family listed and encourage them to do the same. What kind of media (be it liberal or conservative) uses the names of fallen service men and women for monetary or political gain?? (By the way, Michael Moore settled in a suit for using pics of fallen servicemen and women on his website in 2004, something the media never reported.)
The hate mongers among you have no understanding of service(there’s a difference between service and just being in the miltary for x number of years as some of you have stated in responses) to your country or the loss of a close family member serving for your freedom and the freedom of the meek and weak.

By Cherish

October 26, 2005 11:49 AM | Link to this

First I would like to send out my condolences to the families and friends of our lost soldiers.

I now need to remind people that Bush is not God. God decides when it’s our time to go. I’m not saying to blame God for these deaths, by no means. But our lives are in HIS hands.

And, even William Jefferson Clinton thought there were WMD in Iraq!!!! Although we did not go to war while he was pres, that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t about to happen.

And another thing, these couragious men and women enlist in the military to protect our country. If you didn’t want your loved one in war, then they shouldn’t of enlisted. I don’t mean to sound ugly, but it’s the truth. I’m sick of all the whining.

And I understand when people say WWJD? He wouldn’t go to war. Well, if you read the Bible, you will find that God is a vengefull (sp) God. Remember Sodom and Gamora? God is in control.

Lastly, I can’t stand all this “Bush knew about 9/11” crap. Ok, there’s a CHANCE you will die in a car accident today. So no one drive. Come on, folks. Let’s pray for our nation rather than bash each other to pieces!

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 11:51 AM | Link to this

John Elester - Did you contact an attorney to sue the comic strip cartoonist who used his comic strip to list the names of the servicemembers back a couple of months ago?

By darrell

October 26, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

Oh Mike I like this so much that I used it this morning to wipe with. Thank you Mike Liberalovitch.

By Lisa

October 26, 2005 11:52 AM | Link to this

Thank you Mike.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 11:53 AM | Link to this

Doonesberry I believe it was, back in May.

By Anthony

October 26, 2005 11:56 AM | Link to this

Why? The US must maintain and expand its empire and the young, historically, have always been convinced by shrewd politicians to sacrifice themselves for a some pre-packaged “noble” cause. We’re fools to ask ourselves why! Why not! J’espère que dieu ramene aux cieux les pauvres serviteurs de votre zèle.

By Paul Elester

October 26, 2005 11:59 AM | Link to this

Someone phoned this morning to tell me about this cartoon in the AJC. As a family member of one of the fallen listed I am outraged. Outraged enough to contact an attorney and other’s who have names of their departed family listed and encourage them to do the same. What kind of media (be it liberal or conservative) uses the names of fallen service men and women for monetary or political gain?? (By the way, Michael Moore settled in a suit for using pics of fallen servicemen and women on his website in 2004, something the media never reported.)
The hate mongers among you have no understanding of service(there’s a difference between service and just being in the miltary for x number of years as some of you have stated in responses) to your country or the loss of a close family member serving for your freedom and the freedom of the meek and weak.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 12:00 PM | Link to this

John Elester - Did you contact an attorney to sue the comic strip cartoonist who used his comic strip to list the names of the servicemembers back a couple of months ago?

Doonesberry I believe it was, back in May.

By Young

October 26, 2005 12:01 PM | Link to this

Using the logic of some people on here, we would have fought the French instead of the British during the revolution. Bush, etc., want to take the war to Europe, just not the country where the people came from.

Do you really believe that the people, the Saudis who blew up the WTC, didn’t have family still in Saudi Arabia? As much money as Saudi Arabia has that some of it doesn’t flow into terrorist hands. If you don’t believe it, I have some beach front property on Bankhead Hwy. for you.

By george

October 26, 2005 12:04 PM | Link to this

Supporters of this war are using the same logic that drove our Vietnam involvement; it we don’t fight them (radical Islamists or commies) over there, we’ll have to fight them over here. I didn’t make any sense then; it doesn’t make any sense now.

This war will be won with ideas, not bombs and guns. It’s too bad we have a president without an idea in his head.

By James

October 26, 2005 12:05 PM | Link to this

Most of you who claim to be current or prior military, conservative, Republican…but you just happen to be against this war, any war, this president and any policy coming out of the capitol today, you’re liars. You’re no more military than I am from another planet. Most of you libs don’t give a rats a** about the people in uniform, you could care less. You use this to promote your own agenda. Most of you are tax wasting pansy cowards who enjoy the freedom U S soldiers have afforded you. If you don’t like the United States, take I 85 to the airport, put your worthless rear ends on a plane and go to whatever American hating country you’ll fit in with and hopefully one day a real U S soldier will use your worthless head as target practice. Bite me.

By Richard Kuehne

October 26, 2005 12:09 PM | Link to this

My, my, what makes Luckovich so special to get the LARGEST area of print since, oh….9/11. I guess the AJC LIBS wanted to get even with the terrorists….Nice job…I’m not going to be bothered with this leftest drab any longer. See ya AJC and the 69% of the dumb butts that agree with this anti-Liberty, anti-women, anti-Iraq junk. By the by, did Egypt even sent any monies for Hurricane Relief?

By Tread

October 26, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Are we turning into a bunch of small minded robots? Folks there were no weapons - PERIOD. We’ve known that for the past 15 years. Our own spy statelites (yes like the very ones that told us SCUDS were being moved around back in ‘91) could prove that. Our main concern should’ve been putting pressure on SAUDI ARABIA and their royal family, I do believe 12 -15 of the 9/11 terrorist were SAUDI. Let’s get Bin Laden and then IF there are any other TERRORIST groups in the region get them. But nooooo, we’re all hpyed-up on this Christians versus the EVIL Islamic terrorist. Kinda makes me wonder What Would Jesus DO?…sounds like a CRUSADE to me…and not the Billy Graham kind either, more like KNIGHTS in Shining armor (or tanks)…

By Brian

October 26, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Wow, this is truly amazing. All of this over a cartoon. A CARTOON people!! I know why. You know why. All God’s children know why, in their own opinion. Opinion’s are like butt h*s, everyone has one. But is ANYONE listening to the posts by military men and women who are currently serving? They believe in what they are doing. They are doing THEIR job. They may not agree with OUR President but they have a job to do and they are doing it. Let us not forget, they volunteered for this job, no one held a gun to their head and forced them to join the military and last I checked we do not have a draft so how can it be said that they died for no reason? They joined knowing this was an option, UNLESS they only joined to get the free college money which would have been stupid to begin with.

Wow, again, all this over a cartoon. Do the pictures of our military personnel blowing bubbles with Iraqi children illicit such debate? Do the pictures of Iraqi citizen’s praising and thanking our military stir as much as passion? Not by a long shot and that is truly sad. But hey, maybe I will meet you all out in the pumpkin patch with Linus next Monday to await the arrival of the great pumpkin. I would be ashamed to admit I support a man that sits around on his fanny just to take what, 5 minutes, to DRAW something that insults what he doesn’t believe in? What a shame. Now I will just sit back and watch the liberal insults roll in.

By michael

October 26, 2005 12:12 PM | Link to this

Now is this “WHY” for the 2000 lost in a number of years in Iraq, or for the thousands more affected and killed by 9/11, or for the thousands killed on D Day, or Vietnam, or any war. Maybe fighting over there is not better than dying over here in his mind. Maybe we just need to “love” the terrorist!!! as they kill us.

By JB

October 26, 2005 12:17 PM | Link to this

You should not have spelled the word ‘Why’ with the names of deceased whose stance on the war you do not represent. Perhaps you should’ve used their names to spell the word ‘Iraq’ since we all know they died in service there. Inappropriate and disrespectful. Disappointing Lukovich, I typically love your stuff and I voted for Kerry, but this is out of line.

By RDB

October 26, 2005 12:17 PM | Link to this

By John W.

October 26, 2005 11:19 AM | Link to this

Hey Jesus…I am assuming by your name you are either “Christâ€? or an illegal alien. Stepping out on a limb, I am going to go with illegal alien…..Of course you could look under impeachment in the dictionary and you will find a picture of Bill Clinton…… And do NOT think for a minute that the Muslim Terrorists do not want all AMERICANS dead..even you illegal Mexi-Americans. Thank You for the hate

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 12:19 PM | Link to this

Thanks James for adding to the moron factory. And let’s not forget good ole’ Richard. Sayonara Richard.

By Bcrews

October 26, 2005 12:21 PM | Link to this

Why dont you ask the thousands of women and children with Bullets in theirs heads laid out in the desert Mike… Maybe you’ll find your answer there,..

By Anthony

October 26, 2005 12:23 PM | Link to this

“If you don’t like the United States, take I 85 to the airport, put your worthless rear ends on a plane and go to whatever American hating country you’ll fit in with and hopefully one day a real U S soldier will use your worthless head as target practice. Bite me.”

Love it or leave it, eh? As if anyone in this country, except the rich, can just leave this country and go to another. Maybe, I will, be unlucky enough to have our own soldiers using my head for target practice. It is a historical pattern that armies are eventually used to subdue the civilians which they we’re initially commissioned to protect.

By Terry

October 26, 2005 12:28 PM | Link to this

Que: It’s this world domination thing that bothers me. Enough Muslims believe in this destiny to make it the heart of the problems we’re having in the Mid-East. And I think it is also the basis of the problem moderate Muslims have within their own countries with their dictatorial political structure.

Any religion is bad when it is used to subjugate people. And the Christians have been just as bad as the Muslims (the 400 years of Inquisitions).

But, the current state of radical Islamic ideology does not lend itself to peaceful coexistence with other faiths (and the madreassas don’t help).

By scott

October 26, 2005 12:32 PM | Link to this

MIke:

You and the liberal AJC have finally done it. I will join the thousands who dont subscribe anymore.

lets all bury our head in the sand.

By Keith

October 26, 2005 12:35 PM | Link to this

Mike’s cartoon offers nothing to the discussion of the war in Iraq. If this were an election year, the casualty count might influence some to vote for Bush’s opposition, but the casualty count has no relevance when deciding our next course of action in Iraq.

If 2000 deaths is some magic number that signifies our failure in a war, then I suppose we should have just given up in WWII on June 7th, 1944. To put this in perspective, the Americans lost 2393 on June 6th , 1944. Given the prevailing sentiment in the United States today as expressed by the likes of Mike Luckovich, we should have just quit WWII since D-Day was obviously such a dismal failure.

But let’s look beyond politics for once and consider the practical consequences of pulling out of Iraq now. Some think that “peace will break out� if US troops leave right now and all the killing will end. But, in reality, if US troops pull out now, civil war will break out. And what are the possible outcomes of a civil war in Iraq?

First, the Shiites could win on their own. They aren’t the best fighters, but they have the numbers. Outcome? Hundreds of thousands of deaths, oppression of the Sunni minority and possibly an anti-American Iranian style government in Iraq.

Second, the Sunnis, who are much better trained than the Shiites, could win. Outcome? Hundreds of thousands of deaths, return of Ba’ath Party control in Iraq, oppression of minority Shiites and Kurds, establishment of an Al-Qaeda safe haven similar to what they had in Afghanistan before we booted them out.

Third, a regional war in the Middle East sparked by either Syria’s entrance into the civil war because the Sunnis are loosing or Iran’s entrance into the civil war because the Shiites are losing. Outcome? Hundreds of thousands of deaths on both sides of the conflict.

All these scenarios will result in hundreds of thousands, if not millions of Iraq deaths. I just don’t understand how those who claim to want peace could push for an action that will undoubtedly result in so many deaths?

The reason we went to war are now irrelevant, but the outcome of the war is very relevant. We make take casualties in the short term if we stay in Iraq, but those sacrifices will pay off in the long run if we can help Iraq form a stable government. On the other hand, there are no good outcomes for the US if we pull out now.

By jack franklin

October 26, 2005 12:36 PM | Link to this

Mike’s cartoon will certainly be enjoyed by the folks that want to kill Americans. It’ll also add to the casualties.

By Terry

October 26, 2005 12:36 PM | Link to this

Rick J: “Thou shall not kill”?

Read Deuteronomy 13:7-11

By Mark

October 26, 2005 12:36 PM | Link to this

John W… you’re an idiot. Bad back… whatever. If you’re so gung ho on the war, join up. I’m sure they’d find a use for you if you could pass the IQ test.

And as for your and Keith FitzPatrick’s comparison of this quagmire to WWII… please… we were fighting two of the most militarized and fanatical nations on earth for the future of human society in a global conflict like nothing the world had ever seen… and we were able to fight and win it in four years. Three years into Iraq — essentially a third world country — we’re still stuck with no exit strategy. If the Bush bunch had been running WWII, we’d all be speaking German or Japanese now.

Yes… Saddam was a bad guy… but he had no connection to 9/11 and no WMDs… the trumped up reasons for this war. If just being a bad guy was reason enough to be at war, we’d be in Sudan, North Korea and God knows how many other countries.

It’s the responsibility of every good American to ask “why” whenever we put our men and women in arms in harms’ way. It’s knee-jerk (or is that goose-step) knuckleheads like John W. who allow bad leaders to do bad things to good countries. Hitler was a conservative too, John W.

By Drew

October 26, 2005 12:38 PM | Link to this

The only “why” I ask is why do they let you keep doing this. Your drawings are proof positive that you don’t know or understand what the war is about.

By James

October 26, 2005 12:39 PM | Link to this

Hey Voice of Reason: Your mother already added to the moron factor when she flatulated you out.

By James West

October 26, 2005 12:39 PM | Link to this

We attacked Iraq because they had more favorable targets than Afghanistan to show off our smart bombs —- plain and simple. These weapons didn’t work too well in Afghanistan —- a 10th century country with thousands of tunnels and caves. “Shock and Awe” would win the day —- remove a horrible despot —-not great troop strength to hold and secure what had been won. Can anyone say —- “pathetic planning?”

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 12:39 PM | Link to this

Keith - You make very strong points, and it’s nice to see somebody who actually knows the difference between Sunni, Shiite and Kurds. However, that civil war is going to happen with us there or not. The military that we are “creating” will crumble as soon as we are gone. They are already unreliable, and without us, they will run back to their religions or regions.

By Martin

October 26, 2005 12:41 PM | Link to this

To David: Why do you choose to ignore the thousands or tens of thousands of INNOCENT Iraqi civilians killed as a result of the invasion of their country? Why do you choose to forget that Saddam would not have been in the position of power he was in if it wasn’t in part from the financial and military support of the first Bush president? Why do you conveniently ignore that fact that all but one of the 9/11 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia (one of our supposed allies) and NONE came from Iraq? Why do you continue to believe the proven LIE that Iraq was behind the 9/11 attacks? By the way, whatever happened to that Osama guy anyway? Why do you think Christianity is innocent of persecuting and killing people of other faiths (anybody remember the Crusades?) Why do you not concede that Iraq has become a quagmire of political chaos and a haven for a lot more terrorists than when Saddam ruled?

Why? I’ll tell you why. Because it is lot easier for people like you to believe the lies being crammed down your throat by Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity than it is to actually think for yourselves. So go ahead, be a sheep and never exercise your right to hold our leaders accountable and question the reasons behind their actions. But I and millions of other tax paying citizens are the ones footing the bill for this pointless and meaningless war and I demand to know exactly what it is we are doing and why!

By robert

October 26, 2005 12:42 PM | Link to this

brilliance

By Jon

October 26, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this

There were over 3,000 reasons given on 911 as to why we are in Iraq. What will it take for some of us to wake up, 10,000… 100,000. Iraq is not a war in itself, it is a battlefront on the war against terror. Saddam was not directly related to 911, but he did have the same mentality and would create whatever destruction he could to the US if given the opportunity. It is also proven that he had a relationship wih Bin Ladin and even considered to give Bin Ladin safe haven even before 911 when he was kicked out of Saudi Arabia. By taking Saddam out we have eliminated a serious threat to the US, set up the opportunity to create a freedom in a part of the world that has never experienced it before, stopped the genocide of 100,000 + innocent Iraqis, and put our intellegence in a region that is centered around the heart of the terrist regimes, resulting in more effective mobility against the terrorist organizations and better intellegence to prevent another 911 or worse from happening to us again.

By Orson

October 26, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this

People like Mike and other anti-war protesters are killing the moral of our fighting men and women. For Que who did serve you know what I am talking about. We as soldiers can have all the support of our family and friends but when the American public does not support us it hurts. Imagine your first love breaking up with you and its 100x worse. I served my country in an Infantry unit, never saw combat but would have died defending all those that do support me and those that do not, why you ask? Becasue I had the courage to defend the constitution of the United States from all enemies foriegn and domestic, and Mike only has the courage to spit in the face of those that have defended and are defending this country, its people and its beliefs.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 12:49 PM | Link to this

James - Good one! I suppose you exhausted yourself coming up with that one. So I’ll give you a little more time to come up with something better.

I feel better for being shot at and watching friends die so you can run your mouth with that boring 8th grade garbage.

By JB

October 26, 2005 12:50 PM | Link to this

I think “Why?” is a valid question. I find it amusing, though sad, that all someone has to say is “I’m a Christian” and it is interpreted as him being a great person and President. I even heard ministers encouraging citizens to vote for Bush for that reason alone which is ridiculous. As a Christian myself I cannot judge him personally but I can judge his logic for decisions he has made, or at least decided to concur with. If we were most concerned about the greatest threats to the US it seems Iran and N. Korea would be in line as priority after Afghanistan which seems to be on the backburner nowadays. And if we were concerned about the murder of innocent citizens, we would be visibly involved in the genocidal war in Darfur. BUT, as someone previously mentioned the people being killed there don’t quite a have a light enough skin complexion or natural resources we want to obtain. I, however, fully support the troops and I hope they get a greater welcome home when they return than did the troops returning from Vietnam. For all the internet surfers, go to the websites for some of the news publications from other countries and see how negatively they think of Mr Bush also.

By Ben Dover

October 26, 2005 12:52 PM | Link to this

Hey Mike Luckovich, 656 people were killed on Atlanta highways in 2003. You do the math for 2004 and 2005 then ask yourself “WHY”?

By James

October 26, 2005 12:55 PM | Link to this

Voice of Reason, you are not now nor have you ever been in the military. You’re a coward liar.

By W. T. Marrow

October 26, 2005 12:58 PM | Link to this

I ask the same question every time a soldiers life is lost. If the Iraquis wanted freedom they could have taken the dictator and his family out a long time ago. Bring our troops home NOW!!

By SRF

October 26, 2005 01:00 PM | Link to this

I just cannot wait for the miracle ! When Hillary gets elected in 2008, Peace will break out all over the world. There will be joy and happiness, all Jihadists will stop blowing people up and the stock market will hit record highs. Since life is so simple, that one man has destroyed the earth, I cannot wait for the miracle worker to come. I know the AJC staff will dance in the streets in Nov 2008.

By AB

October 26, 2005 01:03 PM | Link to this

Why would you choose to denegrate the contributions of those soldiers by putting their death before their accomplishments? I have no problem with the question or the debate, but to use those brave soldiers names sickens me in a way I cannot describe. My sympathy to the 2000th soldier’s family as well as the others. You should all read Michelle Malkin on townhall.com.

By Cliff

October 26, 2005 01:05 PM | Link to this

Why? Pretty lame tribute if you ask me.

The crap the Left and the Right try to provoke in this country is for morons. The Liberals with their “hard-hitting, thought-provking” BS” and the Conservatives with their flag waiving and thoughtless redneck rhetoric are two versions of the garbage. “Why” written in names has about as much impact on the educated independents in this country as Toby Keith singing his patriotic crap does. Almost none. Mike, stick to trying to be funny. Your serious side is as lame as the people you are attempting to mock.

By Will

October 26, 2005 01:07 PM | Link to this

I know people that have served in Iraq and they all say that we have found WMD’s in Iraq, the media just doesn’t report it. Also, people from the middle east killed 3,000 Americans on 9-11. We have to start cleaning house somewhere, and a murdering dictator like Saddam seems like a good place to start.

If terrorists blew up Atlanta you liberals would probably blame it on everyone but the terrorists. Idiots….

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 01:08 PM | Link to this

James and you know that how? lol. I have two bronze stars, a combat action ribbon, and and Iraqi Freedom medal to prove. Not that I feel it is necessary to do so. And even I weren’t in the military, what I am saying is still correct.

I’m going to stop commenting on the moron factory because you guys are starting to outnumber me. But Jon has just recieved honorary membership. When has Saddam ever physically projected a threat to the U.S.? STOP using 9/11 because the culprit behind that is laughing while sipping tea and watching Fox News.

Orson - answer me an honest question from one service member to another. Do you think infantrymen, or anyone serving on the front line, fight for the person next to them or for the fact that Saddam was a bad guy?

By Jesus

October 26, 2005 01:15 PM | Link to this

Brilliant?

You people have avenged the lives of those 3,000 people killed on 9/11 by sacraficing at last count 2,000 more of your own, plus another 25,000 innocent Iraqi women and children.

Forgive them father for they know not what they do…. in my name.

By Que

October 26, 2005 01:15 PM | Link to this

I for one have decided to make this my last entry in this comments page. I started out interested in what people had to say and slowly my interest turned to anger. In becomming angry I lashed out at someone I don’t know which I never do. We all really have to agree to disagree.

So my final comment is this. I am Apolitical, but I voted democrat. We lost the election to a republican and I lived with that prospect and even decided to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. It did come clear to me that I could no longer give him that benefit. I feel he has become the worst president we have ever seen. Not because he is republican but for what he has done in the name of the people of the U.S. To me it boils down to a simple thing. We went to war with Iraq for WMD. I never heard word one about freeing a country or bringing democracy to a country prior to the start of the war. It wasn’t till it was quite evident that there were no WMD, did the rational change. My subsequent research has also suggested to me that even the WMD rational was for the most part false as well. In other words, the justification was a plain lie.

Now folks we have to ask ourselves is it ok for leaders of this country to lie to us. If we allow them to get away with it once then we have no one to blame but ourselves when they do it again. That goes for Democrat and Republican.

Some of you disagree and I respect that and god bless you. But there is nothing that can be said here to change my mind as I doubt I can change anyone mind on the other side of this issue. However, instead of constructive dialogue, this has turned into a name calling diatribe with one side against the other so I choose to no longer paticipate. Take care all!

By Ben

October 26, 2005 01:16 PM | Link to this

Mike:

If you have to ask by now, you’ll never know. And none of your braindead, ignorant, liberal fans will know, either.

I actually feel sorry for you liberals. As it frustrates me to see the death of my brothers and sisters who fight for the freedom of the world (not just America) and as it frustrates me that Bush doesn’t authorize the tactics I would implement on the ground, I can’t imagine how frustrating it would be to be a liberal: so incapable of understanding why this war is taking place.

“Instead of inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors. In halting our airstrikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance — not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed,” -Bill Clinton

“Those who doubted whether Iraq or the world would be better off without Saddam Hussein and those who believe today that we are not safer with his capture don’t have the judgment to be president or the credibility to be elected president.” — John Kerry 12/20/03

“If you don’t believe … Saddam Hussein is a threat with nuclear weapons, then you shouldn’t vote for me.” — John Kerry, USA Today on 2/13/03

What cave were you liberals hiding in during the campaign last year?

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.

By fanoffreedom

October 26, 2005 01:17 PM | Link to this

If the media ever, ever, ever printed the good news out of Iraq and what we are accomplishing, perhaps that would help in alot of peoples opinions of the war. And, if they reported any of the information regarding “Able Danger”, maybe the libs would realize all of this started way before GW was in office. On 9/11, we lost 3,000 of our own and there will be other attacks and it has to be stopped. Saddam killed a million people but he was no threat was he? He had no weapons of mass destruction although he has used them before and more than likely had plenty of time to get them out of the country. For once, I wish people in THIS COUNTRY would have some loyalty to Americans and not terrorists. I have said all I have to say except that I am so ashamed to be an American right now because of the left wing garbage and the fact that everyone is right except the United States. Find another country that will make you happy! I have to go because I have a headace and it George W Bush’s fault!!!

By laura

October 26, 2005 01:20 PM | Link to this

If I hear one more Republican moron chant “freedom isn’t free” I will scream! A quaint and riduculous saying does not excuse the lies of the Bush admisitration and the huge loss of life in this needless war. This war result in more terrorism, not less. This war was a tremendous mistake which will have global ramifications for years to come. So if the only argument for this war you can think of is “freedom isn’t free” then spare me and everyone else. We are too smart to be fooled by you.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

Besides Laura - EVERYBODY knows it isn’t free. It cost about 2,000+ lives and BILLIONS of dollars. And we aren’t even talking about our own freedom.

By The Man

October 26, 2005 01:33 PM | Link to this

That is a great question. WHY do so many people not understand the importance of what we are doing for Iraq and for the future security of our country? WHY do so many people want to critisize every action our presidet makes, but never has any solutions of their own? WHY is it so hard to stand behind our troops and rally them to victory and show our support? So, WHY is a good question to ask, and I am sure each and every one of the soldiers that died for you to ask WHY knew exactly WHY they willingly died for this cause.

By Matthew

October 26, 2005 01:34 PM | Link to this

Why?

I wouldn’t expect anyone who didn’t or doesn’t have the balls to serve (yes, that’s you Luckovich) to understand.

You’ve never served anything more than your own self interests.

The same people who want to throw money at people to “cure” their poverty don’t understand the need to help secure the freedom of the Iraqi people.

Here’s the thing. Who cares why we went in? The president was wrong, but in the act, we’ve deposed a killer on level with Hitler and Stalin and given the Iraqi people back the freedom of choice.

It’s amazing that the same people who want to give and secure a women’s right to choose to abort her child, refuse want to help others secure their own freedoms, or honestly, refuse to fight for choices they don’t agree in (Choice to bare arms, choice pray in school).

Here’s another thing, Mike. My friend, Lake Trout, is over there. You know what bothers him the most? I’m sure you would think that it’s the lack of WMDs. Or the fallout from Abu Grahib. No, Mike, what bother Lake Trout and other Marines, soldiers, sailors, and airmen in Iraq is the ideologically driven falsehoods, misdirections, and just plain crap coming from their own country’s media members.

You paint the worst possible portrait, show only the things that go wrong, and never, NEVER print or write about, or draw the vast number of things that are going right. Lake Trout isn’t hated in Iraq. The kids love him. As do the parents of those kids who will see their kids grow to live in a land where they will not be raped, or killed because of ideas they may or may not have.

I wouldn’t expect a man like you Mike, a man who never had the balls to serve his country, to understand that.

That is why people like you are forever asking why, when the answer is as plain as the smile on an Iraqi child’s face, or the hundreds of mass graves that Lake Trout has seen, or the hundreds of thousands of Kurds Saddam Hussein murdered.

You are a coward hiding behind an ideology, Mike, you and your ilk.

You make me sick that I ever served to protect your right to be a coward.

By D. Smith

October 26, 2005 01:37 PM | Link to this

How many soldiers were killed the day they stormed the beaches in Normandy? Who was the 1,725 soldier killed? Do you know or even care? Mr. Lukovich is obviously “politicizing” this. He probably could hardly wait till that magic numbered appeared. We are doing the right thing by being in Iraq! Just ask yourself, have we been hit since 9/11? No! Then I guess our brave soldiers are doing a great job. So please stop demoralizing them. Putting down the Commander-In-Chief every chance you get does not help the soldiers. They love this president, so get over it. D. Smith

By Mark G

October 26, 2005 01:38 PM | Link to this

Here’s my view on this, and let me start off by saying I was over in Desert Storm for 9 months, even though the war did not last near that long.

We went to Iraq because Bush thought they had WMD’s. Turns out he was wrong, but he was told this by our intelligence community AS WELL as those intellignce agencies of other countries. So, I don’t fault Bush for his decision to go to war. I do fault him for not kicking someone’s a* when he discovered the intelligence was wrong. Someone should have been held accountable. Once we went to war, there are no other decisions to be made. We can not pull out now, Iraq is too unstable and if we did pull out without completing our new mission, then that would dishonor the soldiers that have died thus far. Yes, 2000 soldiers have died, but how many lives have been saved and will be saved now that Saddam is no longer in power? Americans need to realize that our responsibility to civilization lies beyond our borders. We are the leaders of the free world and must act accordingly. These are “GLOBAL” times that we now live in, technology and terrorism proves it. For those against this war, let me ask you this… if your neighbor was getting brutally beaten, and you had the power to stop it, would you step in, or would you just watch it happen? Republicans would step in, Democrats would watch it happen.

By Gerald

October 26, 2005 01:43 PM | Link to this

Hypothetically speaking, would all of the republicans be so gungho if the muslims came over here and decided to remove Bush from power because he didn’t help the people in New Orleans, allows the rich to rob this country, and allows the oil companies to play a game of prices for gas.

Would an insurgency rise? Would civil war break out as soon as the war ended?

And for the people that believe we are over there preventing another attack on American soil, somebody just stole an airplane last week. Obviously, we are not as secure as we think.

By Ricky

October 26, 2005 01:44 PM | Link to this

The posts here show way politics has become more about grand standing and gotcha games then about the real issues. I have read posts spouting both the liberal and conservative talking points. Great you guys can read and recite. Why don’t we actually talk about the issues instead of calling names and accusing whole parties of being morons or cowards. The political climate will not get better in this country until we get away from the pundits yelling at each other on TV and for people to actually talk about issues. It would probably also help if people like Lucko wouldn’t draw cartoons that make a mockery of our service men and women that died serving their country. The knew what their decision to join meant and they took the oath still. These people are the best America has to offer and we will miss their contribution to our society.

By Peace ANd LOve

October 26, 2005 01:45 PM | Link to this

I just seemd eveyone wants to be right and no one wants to be wrong so lets just say were all right. Do we need war? no! Do we need death to have peace? No!! But if it wasnt for the killing of an entire race none of would be here to go at it with each other. So while none of us want to see our family members on that list the list is real he didnt invint it. So get mad at everybody else for the wrong reason but the truth of the matter is if death and war are truly nessary then it would go against the entire concept of a peaceful coexsistance killing for peace is like making love to be a virgin. 1 thing I hope we can all agree on is this war hurts not just the family members but every one in the world. because in the end we are all teaching the lesson that if you feel like someone doesnt like you or your Ideas then its ok to attack kill and enforce your will on them In the end we are no better than Sadam. A life is a life 1 is no more important than the other But thats not how it is huh? If that were true we would have no starvation no hunger and no homelesness.This war is about econimical gain if thats not true why did it take us untill 911 to help all those poor iraqis they have been oppressed for hundreds of years and America did nothing. becasue we dont care unless it effectsOur Peace. We spend more money on war than we do on peace wich makes me think that human beings are violent by nature please prove me wrong and lets stop fighting and start loving!! God bless Us ALL not just the USA!!!!

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 01:52 PM | Link to this

I almost heard Taps being played in the background Mark G.

By SCOTT

October 26, 2005 01:54 PM | Link to this

Wow, very provocative. It’s why you are the nations best.

By John

October 26, 2005 01:55 PM | Link to this

I am positively salivating at the prospect of these neocon liars getting indicted this week. All their pre-war “marketing” is about to bite them in the @&$! Wake up Atlanta! People are about to go to jail! Stop lying to yourself! I have yet to read a post that answers his question TRUTHFULLY. 911 or WMD’s aint gonna cut it this time.

By Danny

October 26, 2005 01:57 PM | Link to this

Most of the messages on this board are classic examples of people reading the AJC, people believing the AJC, and people forming false opinions based on the AJC. (By “AJC” I’m including Luckovich) The sad thing is they print it, and others believe it, not because it’s true, but because they so desperately WANT to believe it. Luckovich is OP-ED Lite, but at the same time, from reading these messages, his extreme bias catches on with some people. Some of his past cartoons have been downright libelous (drowning black people in the back of a bus after a hurricane? remember that one?), and go way beyond freedom of the press, but he obviously has some sort of legal protection. Mike, I admire the effort you obviously took in preparing your cartoon with those names. How sad that its intent is to manipulate by making a false point. You want to know “WHY”? How ironic. Look at the headline on page 1 of the same day’s paper as your cartoon. “Iraqis back constitution”. Ask Iraqis who’ve lost family members to Saddam “Why”. Ask orphans who can blame him for their loneliness. Ask “why” to those who were raped and robbed with his blind eye, if not outright approval. “Bush lied” you say. “Where are the WMD’s”, you ask. What tired, blind arguments. We knew Saddam had them. And by “we” I mean Bush, Kerry, Kennedy, Clinton. They all knew, it wasn’t a question because he’s used them! And then when he kicks the weapons inspectors out, spits at resolution after resolution, I guess we’re supposed to sit back and wait to see IF he’s got them, and IF he’ll use them. It wasn’t an issue when Clinton did it, was it you hypocrites? Only he just wanted to get a slap in, he didn’t want to get the job done. Well you know what, Bush did want to get the job done. And he did. Why are soldiers dying over there? Because they fought for my safety and yours, and for Iraq to be a democracy. They won, and despite the bloodshed, it’s much safer than it used to be. Unstable? Of course, because of the radicals and terrorists who would love nothing better than for us to pick up and go home so they can kill innocents, topple the government and have anarchy. If you don’t believe that you’re either incredibly naive, or one of the many who just want the president to look bad, because your guys are out of power. That’s sad.

By Todd

October 26, 2005 01:58 PM | Link to this

Democrats have the intelligence to realize that not everyone in the world wants to be “American”. We need to take care of Americans instead of other countries. What if your husband or wife spent all your money taking care of some other family instead of your own family - exactly whats happening in the US today.

By Mark G

October 26, 2005 01:59 PM | Link to this

Wow, “Voice” nice rebuttal. After all of this “educating” you have been spounting today, I kind of expected a little more…

By Stace

October 26, 2005 02:00 PM | Link to this

Why, Mike? Because. Because there were 15 UN resolutions ignored. Because there was the genoside of his county people. Because he supports terrorists, both financially and logestically. Because he supplied medical treatmet to know terrists. Because the first Gulf conflict never ended as Sadam signed the treaty.Because he promised to give us “the mother of all wars”. Because all people everywhere deserve to be free, to be able to hate the Predident and ask “Why?”.

By Anthony

October 26, 2005 02:01 PM | Link to this

HI Matthew:

You wrote: “… who will see their kids grow to live in a land where they will not be raped, or killed because of ideas they may or may not have.”

Please mention that Iraqis will be free to live in a land where our military has dropped and is still dropping hundred and thousands of tons of DU munitions. Iraqis will be free to give birth to babies deformed by radiation, to let their children run through fields of unexploded daisy-cutter bombs, grow food in a land so polluted with radioactive materials that they starve.

I also don’t really see anymore courage in letting the government use you as cannon fodder than in staying here in the U.S where corporations and corrupt state governments are stripping our civil rights, education, medicaid and social security funding, all the while, fostering a religious theocracy keeping the general person just dumb enough to go on buying those impulse items at the Walmart check-out ailse so corporations can go on making more money.

Vive le democratie!

By Jesse

October 26, 2005 02:02 PM | Link to this

While everyone has focused heavily on how things haven’t always gone according to plan, no one mentions, that before the war, anti-war protestors were saying that tens and hundreds of thousands of American lives would be lost. Any casualty is tragic. After 2 and a half years of fighting 2,000 is not what everyone was predicting. How angry would we have been if Saddam had used a weapon against us? Then everyone would be on Bush’s tail.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 02:07 PM | Link to this

Mark - I didn’t feel the need to rebut what you said because I agree with you about the whole military aspect, and about finishing the job.

Hearing Taps meant that I was moved and agreeing with you. But I don’t buy into the whole Republican/Democrat garbage.

But since you started to the dialogue about neighbors, try this out. You were in Desert Storm and you know that we incapacitated Saddam big time. Now considering your situation with the neighbor, shouldn’t we, as our brother’s keeper, gone to Darphur and stop that genocide long before Iraq.

You see Mark, it’s not so much about the war for me as it is the reasons our friends are over there fighting still.

By tre

October 26, 2005 02:10 PM | Link to this

Woodstock is over Peace And Love. This is 2005 (not the 60’s), and there is only one group that is right and that is the group that believes that Bush misled the nation into war with the WMD line.

A little honesty is important from Bush. The nation followed him on election night and still believes in him as a competent leader.

I would hate to have a family member lost over fabricated stories.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 02:11 PM | Link to this

And if you want to take it a step further, we can talk about how we are fighting a war that we aren’t properly equipped for and that goes against part of our military doctrine.

By dee

October 26, 2005 02:14 PM | Link to this

If the U.S. was so interested about freeing people from a crazy, power hungry, angry dictator; WHY didn’t they go after the guy in North Korea, Kim Jong Il? He is a more vicious and evil dictator than Hussein can ever imagine to be. He’s killed MILLIONS of his own people over the years and he looks like he’s primed to continue doing so.

He’s stated publicly, loudly, and repeatedly that YES he had WMD’s and YES he would sell them to the highest bidder and YES he dared the U.S. to stop him? He seems a more viable subject than Saddam Hussein….oh wait!!! Kim Jong Il’s country isn’t loaded with OIL…….Gosh how could I forget that?

By Jack

October 26, 2005 02:17 PM | Link to this

Regardless of where you stand on this War issue, this is a great piece of work / art and reflects an artist / cartoonist / journalist at the top of his craft. This is the type of cartoon that hits you like a sledgehammer and stirs emotion in all of us regardless of where you side on this issue. What great care to list all the names of our fallen brothers and sisters in this format. It’s a tribute to them and does not show a lack of support for our troops. Sadly, for me, it shows the terrorists don’t need to attack us right now because we are doing a good job of killing ourselves. Perhaps if the administration was honest and didn’t build this war on a stack of exagerations and lies we all could support this war effort…unfortunately, the administration has lost all credibility at home and abroad post 9/11 and it’s reflected in all these names and the question Luckovich asks. What will become of our post 9/11 diplomatic relations the next time there is a legitimate need for the U.S. to go to war and world knows the United States will make up any story to justify military action? That lack of trust is also a huge loss in addition to these precious lives.

By dee

October 26, 2005 02:19 PM | Link to this

From Ricky:Good point Mike notL, Lucko doesn’t care about whether the families of these great Americans would want to have their name used in a political cartoon to trash the war they died fighting in. He is more concerned with making his President looked stupid and corrupt

NEWSFLASH: The president is doing that all by himself. He needs absolutely no help from anyone else.

By marise

October 26, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this

If our leaders believe so strongly in this mess, why don’t they send their kids? I’ve lost a brother and a son, for what? Or as Mike puts it why?

By Damon

October 26, 2005 02:23 PM | Link to this

Will those who keep saying we are making progress in Iraq cite some examples? I think there would be less dissent on the war if there was actually progress was shown. The plan right now it seems is to outlast the enemy rather than defeat them. The same trap we got into in Vietnam.

I keep watching FOX instead of the “liberal media” to find out our progress in the war. Mostly what I see is Oliver North or Col. Hunt or some other military talking head telling us that we are making progress without saying anything specific. This is not the sentiment I am hearing from people I know who have come back from Iraq. If progress is truly being made then produce some hard results not more rah-rah rhetoric.

By dee

October 26, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

From Joseph:By the way, these 2,000 heroes volunteered for duty and should be honored not used as propoganda by a left wing rag.

Then Why can’t we take pictures of their caskets coming home? And WHY doesn’t anyone in the current administration go to the airport to welcome them home? This was done in the Johnson administration as well as the Nixon administration (VietNam), and also the FIRST Bush’s administration, (Desert Storm), but WHY can’t it be done now? It’s almost as if the current administration has something to hide……….

By Anne

October 26, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this

I drive home from work and see people collecting money to provide armour for soldiers overseas…

I see security alerts go up every time GW’s approval rating goes down…

I hear the half truths about WMD…

2000 are dead from a war we are not winning….

todays quote was be prepared for more sacrifices…. translation - more dead soldiers

please explain, exactly, what has been accomplished - please explain what positive has come from this - in reality - not in the sound bites that come from GW.

How does anyone expect a war to be won against individuals who have warred for CENTURIES and who feel that dying is a GOOD thing. How can you possible win a war under those conditions????

2000 is 2000 too many for this war.

By Rymer

October 26, 2005 02:27 PM | Link to this

Follow the money trail. Where did it go? Who’s getting rich? Who is left po? A surplus we had. That wasn’t so bad! But now we have debt, war and regret. Our safety’s a laugh; our rights cut in half. But soldiers still die and Lucko asks WHY? The blame game begins; we fight from within. Answer the question! But we cannot. Our disgust for each other is all that we’ve got.

By hewhoasks

October 26, 2005 02:29 PM | Link to this

For V of R:

And you can take it a step further: a war that too often is micromanaged from the White House. Look at Fallujah: first the White Hoise said “take Fallujah.” When that was largely done the White House flip-flopped and said “Don’t take Fallujah.” So the US forces had to abandon it with the job more than half done, but unfinished. then it became a hotbed of insurgency and the word was again “Take Fallujah,” and this time the taking was done brutally, with far more loss of civilian lives - and of US lives, too. Bush flip-flopped, and the result was more Americans dead.

It is infuriating to hear, over and over, that the reason for some action in Iraq is “to show resolve.” “Showing resolve” is not a military objective. Worse, if you have to “show resolve,” then you’re faking it. If you’ve got resolve the natural flow of events “shows” you have it.

But at least now Bush has a several-months-long reprieve: we won’t reach the 3000 mark until many more months have passed. The question will still be “why?”

Maybe the answer to “Why?” is that the Congress didn’t live up to, recognize, or exercise its Congressional duty: Congress alone has the right to declare war (and didn’t.) Congress is not authorized to delegate that right to the President - but in effect did. Congress was populated by politicians too chicken to declare war and too chicken to buck the Bush propaganda machine. Sure, Bush wanted the war, but the Congress - all those who voted to give Bush war powers - are just as guilty.

Note that not bucking the Bush propaganda machine isn’t the same as not acting appropriately to defend the United States.

By Ryan

October 26, 2005 02:29 PM | Link to this

If my name where on the list, I would ask you to take it off your cartoon.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 02:30 PM | Link to this

Rymer - Entertaining. But I know part of the people that are left po are actually some of the service members that faught and were injured in Iraq and afghanistan.

By Mark G

October 26, 2005 02:31 PM | Link to this

Sorry “Voice” I took the “Taps” remark as being sarcastic, rather than sincere. See what blogging has done?! :)

I can not remark about Darphur because I don’t know enough about the situation.

I do believe that Bush is trying to make some kind of “good” come out of a war that had false pretenses. Even if though there were no WMD’s, I feel that Iraq is a much better place and the 2,000 lives it has taken so far was VERY worth it.

By JB

October 26, 2005 02:32 PM | Link to this

Oh Mark…I think there might be a few Republicans doing the beating in some cases. Don’t be so quick to judge Democrats, just a helpful hint.(And no I’m not a democrat)

By hewhoasks

October 26, 2005 02:33 PM | Link to this

Wrongo, Ryan: dead men don’t make requests.

You seem to back the war. Was ther ever the slightest chance your name would be on the list?

By Peace ANd LOve

October 26, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this

Ooh I’m sorry I didn’t know love and Peace were out of style how foolish of me give me gun and somebody to kill for what I think is right. What if In the sixties instead of Peaceful protest to stop segregation everyone just said ” YAll made us slaves and now yall made us the lowest of your country lets just kill them for what they did to us. Would African Americans be in the right? America too has a history of the same oppression as these other countries to get where they are and no one lifted a brow. I applaud black people in this country for teaching us even though you did this to us were are not going to retaliate in the same manner we will change you with peace and not violence and that’s why America is great!!! Peace and Love to you!

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 02:35 PM | Link to this

HeWhoAsks - We left Fallujah the first time partly because we were getting whopped. When we left it, it became a stronghold for the insurgency, who claimed victory there. When we had to go back, we had to create more damage.

There was no CLEAR mission. We had Baghdad secured in a few days. After that, we had two objects, find WMD and Saddam and his people. We failed one of those missions and have just been marking time ever since.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 02:39 PM | Link to this

Mark - the skinny on Darphur is basically genocide. One group killing the other because of prejudice and a bunch of other garbage that needs to stop.

Iraq may or may not be a better place. We can’t stay there forever, especially because we aren’t wanted. The problem is, their military is HORRIBLE and will be corrupt once we are gone. Civil War is probably inevitable, and if it does happen, you will see Syria and Iran heavily involved. It might get ugly. It may not be a bad thing in the long run (Civil War helped us), but things are going to get worse before it gets better.

By Bob Dula

October 26, 2005 02:41 PM | Link to this

Shame on Mike and the other liberals who fail to see the truth and support despots and terrorists with their attacks instead of their support. John Kerry must be a liar too. He is on the Senate intelligince committie and supported this war until he saw a way to make these soldiers deaths work to his advantage, just like he did in Vietnam. Why? Why don’t you ask the members of the all volunteer military if it is worth it. Oh that’s right you ignorant liberals don’t have enough respect for our fine military personnel to talk to them. Progress is being made and faster than we did it here in this great country.

By jasimon

October 26, 2005 02:44 PM | Link to this

Where did my comments go?

By jasimon

October 26, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this

O.K., so maybe my other comments were too long (when I get on a rant, I find it hard to stop). But here’s the bottom line: BushCO is DESTROYING America and we MUST hold them accountable for their actions. This was is NOT and was NOT necessary…The price we’re paying is far, far too high.

BUSHMAN says we have to ‘sacrifice more’ - can someone tell me one damn thing HE’s sacrificing? Quit manipulating and lying to America. Maybe Bush should just go Cheney himself.

Anybody remember someone named Osama?

By dee

October 26, 2005 02:50 PM | Link to this

No one wants to talk about Osama — Bush’s popularity rating might go down.

By sct

October 26, 2005 02:52 PM | Link to this

Hey Peace and Love, didn’t you get the memo?

Peace and love lost out to evangelical christianity……

By AntiBush

October 26, 2005 02:58 PM | Link to this

I didn’t vote for him and never would have—so I can complain. GREAT JOB Mike. The reality is we have a Country founded on killing others to get what we wanted. TRUST me this war was never about WMD. It was about revenge and and a very deceitful Bush administration. Fooled the public over and over, and yet, still have fools believing it was the “right thing to do.” I support the troops, but the HE** with the war. The Bush administration should’ve studied Islamic views and beliefs, then they would’ve known, there will NEVER be a successful democracy, only Holy wars….umph umph, and ya’ll still believe it was the right thing to do… Love America

By urblind

October 26, 2005 03:05 PM | Link to this

Does anyone remember, during the 9/11 hearings, all the liberals complaining that if President Bush had just invaded Afghanistan before September 11th the Trade center attacks wouldn’t have happened?

You are proving right here what the response to that would have been.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 03:06 PM | Link to this

Nope don’t recall that one blind!

By James

October 26, 2005 03:07 PM | Link to this

Voice of Reason, truth be told you’re more interested in transgendered rights which probably affect you more than this military BLOG you whinning Daisy Duke short short wearing pathetic excuse of a man. I’d like to take you out some time, and I could do it in one shot. I’d like to show you what a 9 mm Sig Sauer can do to your head. It’d make a hole big enough that I could take a dump in it.

By One for the road (to truth)

October 26, 2005 03:08 PM | Link to this

Oh, Mike. Wow. Look what you have done. All this controversy for daring to question authority. For shame sir. You should learn your place and learn to parrot just as well as all the others have done. These finer citizens who have served in the military, are better Americans than you or I, this populace of the moral and the right (and I use that in two ways), who understand this war. You and I are mistaken. The U.S. did not go to war for any other reason than to bring peace and Democracy to the Middle East. I remember that reason now. And Saddam was a bad, bad man who had weapons. Weapons of Mass Destruction. I remember that too. And 9/11. All but ONE was from Saudi Arabia. Why aren’t we there… hmm… can’t seem to figure that one… OH WAIT. Now I remember. It’s because we’re buddy-buddy with them… no… not Americans…. Just the PRESIDENT & Co. Right, right, right. So they’re safe. WHEW.

And for all of you that keep parroting “fair and balanced fair and balanced�, you ARE acknowledging just how full of BS that is right? “Freedom isn’t free�. Yes, it has a hefty fee. I think I heard that in a movie… about… America. Hmm. And because so many Americans have died for you to have such freedoms you should shut up and not disagree with the almighty republican right-wing president. Wait a sec, that’s EXACTLY the kind of freedoms we are entitled to BECAUSE so many have kept American ideals alive. Notice I said AMERICAN not Christian.

Here’s what I do know. There were no WMD’s. OK. Fine. MULLIGAN. Saddam has been deposed. Good. The man was a sadist who could kill a person while enjoying his lavish dinner. That makes him an evil, soulless cretin. And if you believe in a higher power then I hope that being will torture him for all eternity. And yes, I do want a multinational court to oversee his trial and punishment. The man has to pay for being a sadist criminal. Do I think he needs to die slowly and painfully? Yep. Do I equate him with Hitler… well there’s a special league in Hell and I’m betting Saddam will be drafted upon arrival for that team. WITH his sons. Good. But did 2,000 of my countrymen and women need to die for that? I don’t think so. I get it. The U.N. sucked at their job. I hear ya. He needed to be brought down. 10/4, gotcha. I thought so too when he gassed his own people. So we got him and now we can’t leave. I truly do understand this. If we leave these Iraqis now either Syria or Iran will drop on in for some re-education time about the importance of stamping out freedoms and a democratic system to keep “order�. They’ll all just start killing each other again and someone’s gonna get nuked and that will start a whole new war that no one wants to see. That’s probably a main reason ADVISORS and OPPONENTS didn’t want to go there in the first place. I could be wrong…

“That’s where the bad guys are.� Are you kidding? The “bad guys� are everywhere. N. Korea’s Kim Jung Il is I-N-S-A-N-E and we are SURE he has nukes. Grrreat. We’ll just chill in the desert “where the bad guys are.� BRILLIANT. Speaking of, it doesn’t bother you in the least the man with his finger on the button, the one YOU chose, has an IQ at room temperature? You’re really OK with that? Because I have issues with that. And to all of the foreigners that I have heard say over and over “well, you voted for him.� NO. I. DID. NOT. Nor did ONE HALF of this nation. A 50/50 split does not mean we all support him.

“We’re bringing Democracy to the Middle East�? Not with the people that are there now. These people eat, sleep and breathe their religions. “We’ll change Iraq and go from there!�… tooooooo where? Saudi Arabia? Riiiiight. Oh, how about Syria? Sure they’ll welcome us. Iran, maybe? That’ll happen a hair past NEVER. If you took a minute to learn about these countries governments you’d see that no democracy will ever evolve from the sands of the Middle East.

Rock on Mike L.

“All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.�

By John

October 26, 2005 03:10 PM | Link to this

Idiots! Why? To keep Oil Company profits sky high! Why? To keep Halbuton and Co. profits sky high! Why? Because if Iraq can’t produce oil, it makes everybody’s else oil more expensive, hence more profitable. Why else would you go into a war you know you don’t need with not enough troops to secure the peace?

They lied, they cherry picked the information and they made up the story to make the situation exactly what it is. They wouldn’t do that you say? Prove it. I can prove the above, can you prove otherwise?

By Doug Grimmett

October 26, 2005 03:15 PM | Link to this

Mike Luckovich is living proof that there are lights on in Georgia. Atlanta is very fortunate to have the greatest political cartoonist of our time working for us. With his fearless observation, he distills controversial topics down to the essential truth. Luckovich is on the short list of what makes this a world-class city.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 03:16 PM | Link to this

James - I see the school bell has rang. My you get off the bus (short) fast.

I seriously doubt that YOU know what a 9 mm slug would do to my head, and I seriously doubt that you have the balls to pull the trigger.

But it’s nice to know that you aren’t just a moron - you have issues that you need to get checked out.

By Martin

October 26, 2005 03:18 PM | Link to this

One for the road (to truth) — That was the funniest post I’ve seen yet! Trully Hilarious! LOL

By scott

October 26, 2005 03:20 PM | Link to this

Mike has proven he can be a brilliant cartoonist. He does a really good cartoon a handful of times a year. Pulitzer notwithstanding, I have to echo the commenter who said something like “Mike will never be a great cartoonist, because he lets his bias get the better of him.” Mike just can’t resist the hateful cheap shot.

It’s always fun to watch a comment thread descend from moonbattery to namecalling to personal threats. Way to go, guys - you all covered yourselves with glory today.

“We left Fallujah the first time because we were getting [sic] whopped” takes the cake, though.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 03:21 PM | Link to this

All the morons to the left side of the room. And you unstable bastards join James on the right side!

Stay put and hopefully reality will catch up to you. For now just leave a hole so the rest of us can proceed unimpeded.

By RDB

October 26, 2005 03:22 PM | Link to this

James, you need help. threatening is not the way to get the point across.

By Tony 2 Tails

October 26, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this

Wow, Mike. Very original. Will you make a regular series out of these? Perhaps arrange the names in the shape of an oil well, a big dollar sign, or even one of your distorted W caricatures? You seem to be getting lots of mileage out of other people’s misery - why stop now?

I’ve got a better idea. For your next political commentary, list the names of the 3,000+ innocent civilians who died in the WTC attack. Put them in the form of a WMD, the Twin Towers, or even the word “Because” or “Here’s why”.

Don’t be surprised if some parents of soldiers on your list come calling asking to remove their son or daughter’s name because they “get it”.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this

Scott. You go to the left side of the room please.

By jasimon

October 26, 2005 03:25 PM | Link to this

How’s that political capital working for you, Georgie? How about your mandate? Seen your approval ratings lately? Oh, I know, let’s raise the terror alert…That’s always worked. Now watch this drive.

For all who are FED UP and want to send the message ‘WAKE UP, AMERICA’, please go to www.moveon.org, enter your zip code, and attend a vigil tonight.

If you see me in front of the CNN building, please say HELLO JULIE.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 03:27 PM | Link to this

Have a good evening people. And those of you on either side of the room. STAY PUT! Wait till I get home to move.

By guido

October 26, 2005 03:33 PM | Link to this

Mmmm, a moveon.org supporter plans to have a meeting in front of the CNN center. Who would have guessed it? Perhaps the AJC’s sidewalk is under construction.

By James

October 26, 2005 03:34 PM | Link to this

RDB: I’m not Barney, I have more than one bullet.

By James

October 26, 2005 03:37 PM | Link to this

Voice of Reason, your surgery must have not went well, you infant dik.

By urblind

October 26, 2005 03:41 PM | Link to this

That’s the second time Voice OF Morons has said he’s leaving. Kind of like Moveon was supposed to do just that after Clinton left office.

By jasimon

October 26, 2005 03:41 PM | Link to this

Hey, Guido, I guess you’re talking about me. That’s some pretty funny stuff there. You’re a real riot.

Now watch this drive.

By jack

October 26, 2005 03:42 PM | Link to this

Luckovick and the anti-military left are not fit to say those hero’s names. Take your bigotry elsewhere.

By scott

October 26, 2005 03:42 PM | Link to this

‘Voice’ just implied I’m a moron. I’m crushed.

Uh, it wasn’t 50/50. More like 50.7/48.3 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S.presidentialelection,2004#Electionresults Over three million votes out of 122 million cast is not insignificant, statistically or otherwise. In any case, we don’t elect the President by popular vote. (See Constitution, U.S.)

Or was that just a rhetorical flourish?

By Nancy

October 26, 2005 03:45 PM | Link to this

Mike, it’s a beautiful tribute. I find myself asking “Why” often. Thank you.

By sct

October 26, 2005 03:47 PM | Link to this

Wow guido, I’m impressed!

I didn’t think Bush supporters had a sense of humor. Good one.

By wwwanderer

October 26, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this

Why? OIL. Sorry but most of the responses here are ill informed. Please people do not spout party rhetoric, it sounds unintelligent, and your argument loses credibility. Confirm sources of your information for facts, not opinions given as fact. It just perpetuates ignorance. It’s obvious that some here are afraid of the question and take offense. What is offensive is that we didn’t ask the question before. All the justifications have been proven wrong, and our assumptions aren’t even close. We can only hope that some day a democracy will bloom in the Middle East. That is our only option now. In the mean time good people here and in Iraq will die, I hope we don’t let them down. If any country in the world can make this thing work, from past history, my money is on the USA. No matter our mistakes.

By scott

October 26, 2005 03:49 PM | Link to this

PS DO NOT mistake me for a Bush partisan. I just don’t think wishful distortion of the facts helps anyone’s case. Often enough, it hurts.

What amazes me is that, given what a f*ck-up George is most of the time, that the Dems couldn’t find someone better than K, or failing that, that K couldn’t beat him.

By Gwenola

October 26, 2005 03:54 PM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Luckovich:

This is one statement that has not made me smile. This is the most serious, geniune,…so real and true.

What is the answer to this powerful one word question?

I just read an article that states the soldiers that were injured and died later are not in the 2000 number; if that is true you can start another why.

By Monte

October 26, 2005 03:55 PM | Link to this

Howdy! The number of seriously wounded & maimed seems at least equally important and harder to accept?

By Steve

October 26, 2005 03:56 PM | Link to this

An absolutely brilliant ‘cartoon.’ The best since Lady Liberty crying after 9-11. Thank you, Mike.

By scott

October 26, 2005 03:58 PM | Link to this

wwanderer: your post intrigues.

do you mean “oil” as in “no blood for oil (to make W’s rich buddies richer)!”?

if so, you come dangerously close to illustrating your own comment.

if you mean “oil” as in “the largest known quantity of a resource that literally fuels the world’s economy (not just the US’s)and happens to be found in a region controlled by corrupt thugocracies and medieval religious fanantics” then we can probably agree on some things.

We might even agree that it’s some of both. Or disagree about how much of each.

By wwwanderer

October 26, 2005 04:03 PM | Link to this

Scott, Follow the Money…

By scott

October 26, 2005 04:04 PM | Link to this

“fanatics” (aaargh! sorry. ‘fanantics’ is what people who wear outlandish attire and drink to much at sporting events do.)

monte makes a good point. the dead can’t speak for themselves, and are apt to be used as political pawns by all sides.

the amputees and the paralyzed are a different case. other than the amputees who’ve returned to duty after rehab, i haven’t heard much. where are the amputee/paralyzed protesters?

By knowledge1980

October 26, 2005 04:06 PM | Link to this

YEA…GOOD POINT DEE….WHY DON’T WE GO INTO N. KOREA AND LIBERATE THOSE PEOPLE? I DON’T THINK THE PRO-WAR PEOPLE WANT TO ADDRESS THAT QUESTION.

By Mike

October 26, 2005 04:06 PM | Link to this

Why? Because extremist Islamic followers have pledged to kill as many Americans as possible. That includes the family members of all you who are denouncing the war. We are all anti-war, nobody wants to go to war but if someone declares war on us (like on 9/11/01) then we need to retaliate. The Islamic terrorists who want to kill us actually started this way before 9/11/01. Think U.S.S. Cole, the embassy in Beirut, the World Trade Centers in 1993. Bush is the first President to actually have the guts to retaliate. But I don’t expect all this to matter much to all you who don’t think this war is justified. The reason we were attacked on 9/11/01 is because we sat on our asses all the other times we were attacked. Thanks, Clinton.

By Jon

October 26, 2005 04:07 PM | Link to this

To those of you that still think we went to war with Iraq for oil tell me why we would go after a country that produces less than 13% of the world oil supply. Those of you that still think we went to war for oil probably still believe that George Bush went to war to profit. Tell me how George Bush would profit off of taking a country over for oil. Does he plan on being an oil tycoon after his Presidency? It would cost far less to drill more oil in the Gulf and in Alaska than to go to war for oil. Use your heads. Don’t just take your opinions from Al Frankin

By Cliff

October 26, 2005 04:15 PM | Link to this

Isn’t 13% of the entire world’s anything a lot?

By kimberly

October 26, 2005 04:16 PM | Link to this

That’s right; if you can’t think of something relevant to say, BLAME CLINTON! Can’t you bozos find a new tune to whistle? Clinton and the Democrats have controlled next to nothing for five years, but you still have a h—d on for him, doncha? BTW, EINSTEIN, the terrorists who bombed the WTC in 1993 (just a few months into Clinton’s first term - should we blame Bush Sr?) were caught, convicted, and jailed. Not so with Osama Bin Forgotten, huh?

By E.G. Salomon

October 26, 2005 04:17 PM | Link to this

While I admit that Iraq being on its way to develop its own Democracy is a good thing, I’m also concerned that we’re probably be losing ours in the process if we’re slowly going to a point in which the simple act of disagreeing is inmediately considered as “anti patriotic/american”; left and rigth fighting over what a single person does/says, when that person probably doesn’t even care what either side thinks about him; people like James here are actually willing shoot those who dare to disagree/question a view.

While I’m awared that those are just empty threats right now, what guarantees us that it doesn’t become a fact in the future?

By Arlene Webster

October 26, 2005 04:18 PM | Link to this

This is not a cartoon…it is a statement made by a man who has the right to share his views on this senseless war. 1 American life in this senseless war is too much; 2,000 is astronomically unbelievable. This president is too egotistical to admit he made a mistake by involving us in this war. Instead, he continues to divide this nation and cause anxiety to those families whose loved ones are fighting this war, and grief to those whose loved ones have given their lives. If more people in the media would speak up about this dis-administration in DC, maybe somehow we can have this war ended, and our troops brought home where they belong. Keep up the good work, Mike. I love the way you tell the truth through your cartoons.

By James

October 26, 2005 04:18 PM | Link to this

Unless you are in the military, have a family member or dear friend in the military just SHUT UP. These GREAT AMERICAN men and women are doing what they believe in. Put a rag on your head, believe idiots like Clinton, Farakaan, Jesse Jackson and that kunt Nancy Poloski if you want to. Just shut up. Jez, I’d like to see all of you at the firing range…AS MY TARGET.

By E.G. Salomon

October 26, 2005 04:24 PM | Link to this

Jez, I’d like to see all of you at the firing range…AS MY TARGET.

And I rest my case…

By urblind

October 26, 2005 04:27 PM | Link to this

Arlene has a point. Let’s get our troops out of these never ending quagmires.

Get our troops out of Germany, South Korea, and Bosnia NOW!

By kimberly

October 26, 2005 04:30 PM | Link to this

James needs a hug. Anyone got a python they can lend him?

By Stumped

October 26, 2005 04:31 PM | Link to this

It looks like a cartoon. If it’s not a cartoon what is it? Is it a photograph of a cartoon?

By Midori

October 26, 2005 04:31 PM | Link to this

James,

you would have a bit of credibililty if you could

I was in the military, I have family members in the military, and I do listen to Clinton, Jackson, etc.

And I’m not about to shut up.

People like you not only need to shut up, but put your money where your keyboard is.

If this war gives you such a rush, go fight in it. Save the life or lives of people who are not fans of this illegal quagmire. Go for it.

By Observer

October 26, 2005 04:35 PM | Link to this

Well said Midori!

By Neil Manimala

October 26, 2005 04:38 PM | Link to this

Obviously 2,000 is a heavy number of soldiers killed! Coupled with the perhaps 30,000 Iraqis killed and even disregarding other countries’ casualties, Iraq has proven to be a bloody place. One must agree—no matter what his or her political views are—that the United States ought to leave the country or at least minimize the number of soldiers it has there; in fact, the United States presence may not only instigate the deaths of United States soldiers but also the deaths of others.

By The Other Shoe

October 26, 2005 04:39 PM | Link to this

Those of you patting each other on the back for ripping on James are proving to be just as much of a bunch of douche-bags as James. “Good one Midori!” “You’re the best.” “No you are.” “No you are”.

By S

October 26, 2005 04:41 PM | Link to this

Why? Excellent question? One that George W. Bush has steadfastly refused to answer.

Remember right before we invaded Iraq and Bush was trying to make his case to the American people, the U.N., and the world at large? He stood before the U.N, wagged his finger at the camera, and said “We know Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. We know where they are.” Now that we know this to be completely false, by definition we can conclude one of two things about Bush for making this statement: 1) He’s an idiot for not verifying/confirming the faulty intelligence he was basing his statement on, or 2) He was lying. Did no one ever wonder why no photographic proof of these weapons was ever produced (aside from the fact there actually was none)? The Kennedy administration did it during the Cuban Missile Crisis and the world backed us wholeheartedly. In this instance, we have isolated all but one of our allies and the majority of that country is in no way in favor of this proposterous military action.

And when it was proven that Saddam in fact had no weapons, what did the president say? He said “We’re there to spread freedom.” I never thought I’d see the day when the president of the greatest country on Earth would use the concept of “freedom,” the very foundation upon which this country was founded, as an excuse.

Why? We’re still waiting.

By dee

October 26, 2005 04:44 PM | Link to this

Frm knowledge1980: YEA…GOOD POINT DEE….WHY DON’T WE GO INTO N. KOREA AND LIBERATE THOSE PEOPLE? I DON’T THINK THE PRO-WAR PEOPLE WANT TO ADDRESS THAT QUESTION.

You’re right — they don’t. They’d rather keep believing they see the Emperor’s Brand New Clothes - they’re too afraid to admit, he’s naked. The arguments for the war are fragmented and without merit when you deal with the facts.

If we were going to liberate anyone, North Korea should’ve been the main ones. They have all the same “problems” that Iraq has/had. Why is it more feasible to “liberate Iraq” from a dictator but less feasible to “liberate N. Korea”? Especially when we know for a FACT, (because Kim Jung Il told us), that they not only have WMD’s they are willing to SELL them to anyone who’s willing to pay. If we are so concerned about the future of our country, N. Korea shoul be at the top of our hit list. They’re argument just doesn’t add up or make it past the “smell” test.

By Nathan

October 26, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

I was regretful when I saw the Que would no longer be involved in this discussion. His views and delivery of those views is to be commended. While I can understand the war supporters frustration with people who refuse to hear, they should not lower themselves to the vile attacks that the liberals are so good at it… and whitty too.

Que, if you happen to read this, you said that you never heard anything about spreading freedom. You should read some of the many speeches in which Bush said that free nations do not resort to terrorism, or heck just read the Bush Doctrine. You are one of the few anti war people who still have their minds open.

I know that you said your mind cannot be changed, but some of your statements illustrated an ignorance (not derogatory) of past statements (with the current media, I can understand why). Also, the U.N. placed the “Burden of Proof” on Iraq to disclose the wherabouts of the WMD’s, not the “member states”.

By James

October 26, 2005 04:52 PM | Link to this

You brainless no backbone over the top leftist idiots don’t have a clue how much you hurt our troops with your anti-Bush, which is anti-American, rhetoric you give to your enemies to use to help recruit people to blow themselves up in the name of jihad. You are playing right into their slimy hands. you don’t care about the men and women in uniform. Don’t lie and say you do, you bunch of cowards. Your attitudes kill our morale over there, they hurt. You DO NOT deserve to live in this country, to salute my flag, or breath free air. You make me sick.

By Nathan

October 26, 2005 04:56 PM | Link to this

Dee and Knowledge,

North Korea, come on guys. Has N. Korea been known to have used WMD’s, invaded another country been kicked out and not lived up to the cease fire agreement. that is the nuts and bolts of why we invaded Iraq. I will always refuse to allow myself to get lost in the Democratic nuance. Saddam was a menace and a destabilizer, both Republicrat and Democrat thought so, and he was making a mockery of the U.N. If we need the U.N.’s assistance in the war on terror (which I think we do) they words have to have meaning. U.N. resolutions have to more than threats of paper cuts.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 04:56 PM | Link to this

Scott - Chew on this while you are in the moron corner.

The military is made up of mostly 18-26 (or may 28) year olds. Most of them voted for the first time in their life without any knowledge of the real world. Of course they voted for their Commander in Chief because that’s all they knew.

Do your homework foolish one. I’m sure you’ll find that the military vote for Clinton was pretty high too.

By wwwanderer

October 26, 2005 04:58 PM | Link to this

Jon, Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world. No ,it is not about George going into the oil business, he’s sunk one oil company already. A threat to oil is as much of a national security threat as Russia was during the cold war ( and no, Al-Queda doesn’t even pose nearly the threat, that Russia did, not even close), there would be no American economy, without cheap oil, hence a plentiful supply. What do you think they were talking about in that Energy task force, the increase in India/China demand and less access to the open markets. And keeping his biggest contributors happy doesn’t hurt. That being said the real war is between the Islomo-Facists against the Moderate/Modern Muslims trying to drag dysfunctional societies into the modern world. Unfortunately they see us as complicit in supporting the corrupt regimes that govern them. I find it a little too convenient excuse to use us as the great satan.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 04:59 PM | Link to this

James, James, James! It’s medication time. It’s my flag too, and the only thing red, white and blue that you salute are the budweiser cans littering your front porch!

By the way, you morons and unstables can move. I am home to my family safely.

By Jon

October 26, 2005 05:02 PM | Link to this

If you want to compare N. Korea with Iraq we will need to continue to try to diplomatically and peacefully try to resolve the issue for another 10 more years. Bring the question of war up to the President in 2015 if nothing is resolved.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 05:05 PM | Link to this

Our opportunity to deal with N. Korea, China, Iran and Syria past in late 2003.

By Jon

October 26, 2005 05:08 PM | Link to this

My point exactly. We gave Saddam more than enough time to comply before we went to war.

By sickoftheneocons

October 26, 2005 05:09 PM | Link to this

Jon, your an idiot. Period. If you buy into the whole Bush doctrine then you know that the whole idea is to strike them before they strike us. So logically, if you follow the Bush doctrine, you’d want to wipe North Korea off the face of the Earth before they have a chance to fire a nuclear weapon at our Western shore or Hawaii or sell those weapons to someone else who will. COME ON! Preemptive strikes against North Korea is the ONLY way to go to prevent more Americans from being killed, if your a Bushie that is!

By OceanView

October 26, 2005 05:12 PM | Link to this

You just have a unique ability to capture the truth. So very moving.

By terri

October 26, 2005 05:15 PM | Link to this

Why? President Bush gave us the reason, but we weren’t listening. He got us into a poorly planned war because Saddam Hussein is “the man who tried to kill my daddy”. This is not made up. I saw him on the news at a press conference before the war started, and that is exactly what he said.

By Jon

October 26, 2005 05:16 PM | Link to this

If after we exhausted all means of diplomatic and peaceful attempts to resolve the N. Korea issue then what would you do? Obviously if the Bush Doctrine meant to wipe our threats off the face of the Earth, why is N. Korea or Iran still standing? We should try to diplomatically resolve the issue in N. Korea at this point and that is what George Bush is doing.

By sickoftheneocons

October 26, 2005 05:16 PM | Link to this

I’d like to ask all the supporters of the war on terror…WHEN WILL IT END? Suppose we achieve our so-called mission of liberating and democratizing Iraq? Where next? The painful fact is that there will ALWAYS be terrorists in this world who will have the capability and will to strike against the decadent West (America). Unfortunately, there is just no possible way to eliminate every terrorist on the globe no matter our military might. My whole problem is not that we are in Iraq. I believe it to be a noble cause (assuming we are there for that reason), my problem is that Bush has, hopefully unwittingly, entered America into a war that can drag out for decades. It has become a self-perpetuating cycle.

By E.G. Salomon

October 26, 2005 05:18 PM | Link to this

James - And apparently you haven’t realized that your constast display of hate is not only giving ammo to the “communists”, but also damaging the morale of your own people by giving them a bad image.

Anyway, I’m sure most soldiers out do not fight the battle because of Bush (hence not supporting Bush does NOT meant not supporting the army), but for a far more important cause: The welfare of their own family/friends/self. Each person has his/her own reason to be in the army, which might not be for the whole country’s populance, but at least a few ones inside this very country.

And if you have to know, I do have a really dear friend in the army that told me that very same thing once: “I’m doing it for my friends and family”

If you think otherwise, fine; just don’t put yourself as the voice of the American Army…

By sickoftheneocons

October 26, 2005 05:20 PM | Link to this

We kill some terrorists in Iraq. The rest move to Syria where they launch another attack against the U.S. We, predicatbly, invade Syria to “root out the terrorists” and establish another mini-America in Syria. The terrorists who are “rooted out” of Syria move to another country where they launch an attack against America and then we invade that country and so on and so on ad infinitum. When does it end?

By sct

October 26, 2005 05:30 PM | Link to this

Lets not forget about China. Their human rights violations are well documented and severe.

Totalitarian communist regime

Persecution of christians and other religions.

Weapons of mass destruction (not the imaginary kind)

Arbitrary Detention

Death penalty (Defendants do not have access to lawyers, white collar crimes given death, 77% of world executions)

Tibet

Infanticide (Female babies)

Womens rights (Trafficking and sale of women as brides or into prostitution, spousal abuse)

Family Planning Policy (abortion, denial of property rights, lowered wages and other penalties applied to violators of one child policy)

Arbitrary Detention

Censorship

LETS INVADE CHINA NEXT!!!

By Neil Manimala

October 26, 2005 05:31 PM | Link to this

When America becomes an empire; of course, someone more powerful will arise.

By John

October 26, 2005 05:41 PM | Link to this

Did you hear what Iran’s president said about Israel and the United States today…..and you ask WHY ? What picture needs to be drawn for you on this ? I suppose we should yank our troops out of the region… bury our heads in our work, T.V. and sports and maybe all these people that don’t like us will go away ?

By The72John

October 26, 2005 05:42 PM | Link to this

The only people who don’t deserve to live in America are the ones who spend all of their time and venom telling anyone who doesn’t share their opinions that they don’t deserve to live in America.

And yes, I know that sounds like circular reasoning, but you know what (and who) I mean.

By Voice of Reason

October 26, 2005 05:48 PM | Link to this

72John. Please pass through the middle of the room and don’t pay any attention to the people standing to your left and right. Do it quick though, the unstables on the right like guns. lol

By Neil Manimala

October 26, 2005 05:49 PM | Link to this

Indeed! The only reason for these political differences in a legitimate America is because different people have different views on what’s best for the people; that is, they all have the best interests of the people in mind. So what’s the point if we’re destroying each other in the process? Personally, I think that the only time when one should attack another is when he or she severely assaults your family’s honor, your motherland’s honor, or your spouse’s honor. I think I went off on a tangent though, but you get my point.

By Chris

October 26, 2005 06:05 PM | Link to this

James. James, James, James. It’s sad to know my country includes people who think that criticism of their government is anti-American. Really. Your statements suggest you know nothing about my nation’s history of dissidence. (Go to www.m-w.com for a definition.)

We as a nation exist and thrive only because we consider it to be self-evident that a man or a woman can and should speak about that with which they agree or disagree. Take that away, even if just by way of a guilt trip, and you, James, are not a true American.

You suggest that non-military families have no say in their nation’s actions. That’s a putrid hunk of s**, and to believe such bunk is evidence of your social blindness.

Before you b*** about those who wear turbans — that’s what grown-ups call the “rags” to which you referred — try ridding your mind of the warped notion of patriotism you’re so quick to swallow.

To be patriotic is to listen, learn and discuss. To march behind an army of followers that don’t question their elected leaders about their destination — that, James, is sheer stupidity.

By James

October 26, 2005 06:17 PM | Link to this

If you bunch of ‘should of been abortions’ think I care about you think of me…then your stupidty is far greater than I first realized. By this time next year, I hope you all are sitting on a rooftop in New Orleans waiting to be rescued by the government your welfare sucking scumbags.

By Julian

October 26, 2005 06:25 PM | Link to this

There is one nation that REALLY is linked to 9/11. There are many nations that REALLY do have WMD’s. There are nations that REALLY have threatened us (Saddam never said he would attack us). There are many nations that REALLY do kill many more of their own people. WHY? We would REALLY like to know Mr Bush, Mr. Cheney, Mr Rove…

By Barry

October 26, 2005 06:37 PM | Link to this

No one has given a concrete answer to the posed question. We’ve been lied to over and over but we have so many uneducated IDIOTS that get fooled by the biggest idiot of them all, our PRESIDENT. I don’t want to hear about if’s and’s or but’s- because even if we kill every terrorist in Iraq the PRESIDENT can’t guarantee that our country will be safe from terrorism.

This is why EVERYONE else in the WORLD thinks our PRESIDENT is a total IDIOT. We have a moron that can’t speak a straight sentence forcing our soldiers to fight a war without a reason or an end. I really hate it for the families of these soldiers that are suffering. What isn’t mentioned is all of the soldiers that come back injured and handicapped for life. I wish Bush could focus on helping our country out of it’s spiral rather than spending billions on a war based on his PRIDE.

By Caprice

October 26, 2005 06:41 PM | Link to this

A very powerful message, Mike. Thank you.

By Barry

October 26, 2005 06:43 PM | Link to this

Why 911 Mick. History will prove you and the far left wrong once again. Bush sent a message to the world that tyranical dictators won’t be tolerated. Libya woke up. Others to follow. No doubt in my mind that the World will be a safer place for my daughter given a few more years. Can you imagine John Kerry on the right side of History. Stick with him.

By Kenneth

October 26, 2005 06:48 PM | Link to this

Our troops are the best and will always be. However, they have not always been used correctly and history teaches us this. How many more will die before as a nation we say enough? The war was poorly planned which is a disgrace to our troops. You never go to war unless you really really mean it.

By Greg

October 26, 2005 06:48 PM | Link to this

I hope all conservatives that continue to fund this leftie paper ask themselves the same question. Go ahead, post it.

By Kenneth

October 26, 2005 06:49 PM | Link to this

Our troops are the best and will always be. However, they have not always been used correctly and history teaches us this. How many more will die before as a nation we say enough? The war was poorly planned which is a disgrace to our troops. You never go to war unless you really really mean it. It’s a pity we allow ourselves to be divided when we all wnat the same thing. Or do we?

By Midori

October 26, 2005 06:52 PM | Link to this

Poor Morans.

the more the right is proven to be wrong, the more they yell, shout, kick and scream that they are right.

the only “message” that Bush sent to the world after 9/11 is he is the head moran.

only a moran would go after the guy he thinks is “weaker” and “easier” to defeat.

Oh, yeah.

He knows where the WMD are.

So do I — in the White House.

By Neil Manimala

October 26, 2005 06:52 PM | Link to this

Barry, before you go around calling people uneducated idiots you should realize that you could get your point across without capitalizing whole words and ranting without clear warrants.

By Midori

October 26, 2005 06:54 PM | Link to this

James, James, James.

Anger management classes not working for you?

It must be tough to carry all the hate around inside you.

I sure don’t want to be anywhere near when you blow.

By sickoftheneocons

October 26, 2005 06:55 PM | Link to this

Barry: Let me ask you a question. Would you feel that the world is a better place for your daughters if, one day in the not so distant future, your daughters were riding on a bus or were inside a building that was blown up by some man or woman out of revenge because some innocent brother, sister, father, husband, son or daughter that was killed by one of our soldiers during this war? What would you say then?

By Midori

October 26, 2005 06:56 PM | Link to this

Barry — you did fine.

Keep on keeping on.

Those of us who understand using caps as a tool in communicating understand.

By Neil Manimala

October 26, 2005 06:59 PM | Link to this

That’s the sad thing about online commenting—people like James think that we’ll never find and see them or think about their personality so they post whatever they want. Unfortunately, this includes outpourings of hate and malice.

By Neil Manimala

October 26, 2005 07:06 PM | Link to this

By the way, don’t think that assaulting the intelligence of people has any beneficial effect in debate; it only helps you lose.

By Neil Manimala

October 26, 2005 07:08 PM | Link to this

By the way, don’t think that insulting the intelligence of other debaters will help you win the debate: it’s a childish tactic that invariably fails.

By David Graham

October 26, 2005 07:09 PM | Link to this

Why ? I’ll tell you why because we have boots on the ground. In the middle east. We can strike anywhere we have to in the region within hours. Strategically It’s a brilliant move by our leadership. Iraq is giant flytrap, draw them in and Kill them. Get your head out of the sand and get the big pitcher.

By Midori

October 26, 2005 07:18 PM | Link to this

David — I wonder how you would react if the roles were reversed?

Brilliant? In Bizarro world, perhaps.

By Musia-tusaba-mufaki

October 26, 2005 07:29 PM | Link to this

Thank you mike for this very serious question. The people of Iraq are very nice people and these evil americans keep trying to kill them. Praise Allah, That you have brought a great question that will help us win the Jehad against America.

By Daniel

October 26, 2005 07:31 PM | Link to this

This is a fools war to a fools victory. Our young men and women are fighting for a lie. It will end and we will go on to something else. In the meantime, many more of our young people will die. For my part, I know one republican who has a son in Iraq, and he hates the government.

By darrell

October 26, 2005 07:37 PM | Link to this

Way to go AJC ban some more comments you wimps

By Doug

October 26, 2005 07:44 PM | Link to this

WHY even try to reason with the brain-washed Bush morons?

On one side there are intelligent people asking pertinent questions about our role in Iraq. On the other side, the responses are “you’re an idiot” and “you’re a weenie” and “you’re an America hater.”

WHY is it that the same crowd that usually questions foriegn involvement and claimed the former president was trying to be the “world police?”

It’s normal to question policy (I didn’t care for the “world police” role either). So, why get so hostile? It’s actaully pretty scary. That is how Hitler came to power.

Again, it’s just scary that normally non-government-trusting people are so brain-washed by this president.

By John

October 26, 2005 07:55 PM | Link to this

This is one of the most powerful and heartfelt commentaries—and works of art—I have ever seen. It stopped me in my tracks. Thank you for it.

By John

October 26, 2005 07:56 PM | Link to this

This is one of the most powerful and heartfelt commentaries—and pieces of art—that I have ever seen. Thank you for it.

By Scott

October 26, 2005 08:01 PM | Link to this

Congratulations Mr. Luckovich! You have become the subject of the first entry in my blog, at ssimontis.blogspot.com. Please feel free to read it over and comment.

By The72John

October 26, 2005 08:08 PM | Link to this

It is truly sad to see the people who claim to love America so clearly lacking in understanding of what makes America a great nation. We have James who calls everyone who disagrees with him a…what was it?…should-have-been-abortion?

How pitiful…how small-minded…how completely ignorant of what Democracy and Freedom actually stand for.

I wonder if James realizes what little difference there is between himself and a Taliban fighter there really is…

And seriously folks. The CIA wrote a report months ago outlining how Iraq has become a training ground for future generations of urban guerillas, ready-made for training future Al-Qaeda members. We aren’t shooting fish in a barrel, we’ve created a crucible in which the wheat is being separated from the chaff.

You might try contemplating the complexities of the situation, rather than just saying “US Kill GOOD!”

By Trevor

October 26, 2005 08:09 PM | Link to this

That was the best one i’ve seen yet mike…hell of a job

By Observer

October 26, 2005 08:15 PM | Link to this

James, James, my friend! You need to relax a bit. You’re going to burst a blood vesel! Do you honestly believe the sentiments of American anti-war protestors is going to inspire the jihadists more than the actions that our government has already taken on our behalf? Which do you think inspires a jihadist more, American anti-war sentiments, or the fact that we invaded a Islamic country without provocation and still, years later, occupy said country? Which do you think enrages a young jihadist more, anti-war sentiment, or Americans long standing support of their sworn emeny, Israel? Anti-war sentiment, or the humliation of their Muslim compatriots in Abdu Girard? Anti-war sentiment or the relentless and continual steamroller affect of Western culture at the expense of their eons old Islamic culture? You see, when you think about it the anti-war sentiments expressed by Americans has an insignificant amount of influence for inspiring a jihadist to act as they do.

By John

October 26, 2005 08:24 PM | Link to this

Idiots! Why? To keep Oil Company profits sky high! Why? To keep Halbuton and Co. profits sky high! Why? Because if Iraq can’t produce oil, it makes everybody’s else oil more expensive, hence more profitable. Why else would you go into a war you know you don’t need with not enough troops to secure the peace?

They lied, they cherry picked the information and they made up the story to make the situation exactly what it is. They wouldn’t do that you say? Prove it. I can prove the above, can you prove otherwise?

By paul jaeger

October 26, 2005 08:48 PM | Link to this

Political cartoons are okay, however they mostly seem vicous one sided. I believe the nation has had many problems and whether your a democrat or republican I believe in supporting the man in the White House. Certainly Mr. Bush did not assume the office of the President will the sole purpose of destroying the country. So WHY don’t we TRY pull together and make this country the great country it once was. The bottom line is we are all AMERICANS. I truly hope you take time to read my slant on things and perhaps one day we will all stand up and cheer again. Paul Jaeger Canton, Ga.

By Correctfacts

October 26, 2005 08:54 PM | Link to this

I have one question I just pray that someone will answer for all of us on the “Right”. When has anyone in the Bush Admin. ever stated that S.H. was responsible for the 9/11 attack? Please tell us.

By Dusty

October 26, 2005 09:00 PM | Link to this

Luckovich’s “Why” is another version of the Viet Nam Memorial transformed into an anti-war protest. Nothing original about it. I made further explanation under Luckovich’s commentary. Definitely a no-winner. Just another protester, a paid one at that.

By Boogernose

October 26, 2005 09:03 PM | Link to this

Dear sick…..Get a life pal and quit being mislead by the liberal press. Start listening to the rational comments of people like Rush and Hannity and you too will learn the truth.

Sick…..you have a lot of comments and love to bash….but what would you do to stem the acts of the terrorist that have been going on for decades? (I will bet we do not get an answer to that question)

By Kelly

October 26, 2005 09:08 PM | Link to this

Either you understand the “why� or you don’t. Mike doesn’t understand it. My experience has been that it is best to avoid subjects that one does not understand.

The logic in the comment above is insane. Don’t ask why unless you know the answer.

Another configuration of names that might have spoken just as well as “Why” could have been “Lie.” As in all the lies that were piled up on one another to promote this disastrous war.

There, that better?

By E-Ring

October 26, 2005 09:21 PM | Link to this

Well I see that Flower Children are still alive.and teaching their Offsprings the same B.S.40 years later.I~am going to say the same as I did then,Kiss what Ican~t and I don~t mean my elbow

By Don

October 26, 2005 09:23 PM | Link to this

Why?

So that maybe, someday everyone will have the right to post their thoughts on an Internet message board. Or become a cartoonist, or a soldier, or a teacher or anything they choose.

Hey, I’ve been over in Iraq for two tours, and will probably serve a third before it’s all said and done.

I’m honestly not sure whether I “like” Mike or not — but I like the idea that we, as a free people, can talk about it openly. Part of me worries for the feelings of the families of the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines among the 2,000 names in Mike’s drawing. Another part of me worries for the millions of people who will never get to see the drawing at all.

I think all of us agree that every single life is sacred — and to lose only one, is to lose one too many. Those 2,000 names aren’t just names — they’re people, and families, and friends. But everyone of us has to do what we believe in — and I believe those of us serving are doing the best we can.

Some people may think that our military exists only to wage war. We don’t. We exist to serve and protect you. Sometimes that means you send us to war. One person can’t do that — not even the President. It takes the will and power of each and every American.

If you don’t agree with why we’re over there — make your voice heard.

If you do agree with why we’re there — make your voice heard.

Sometimes it takes a truly significant, emotional event to create change. Sometimes it takes 2,000 of them.

I think the answer to Mike’s question of “Why?” isn’t directed to one person, one party or one religion — but to one people.

Us. All of us, Americans all.

Mike’s work may be beautiful to some, offensive to others. The only thing I’d ask of any of anyone reading this is to act in creating positive change based on how you would answer Mike’s question of “Why?”

By Darrel

October 26, 2005 09:34 PM | Link to this

Why? Simple. Ignorance. There’s a lot of it.

Went to visit the Pulitzer Prize travelling exhibit. Some incredibly powerful photography. I now know why Vietnam was met with such protest…photographers were actually covering what was happening over there. This war, we’re getting a very sanitized picture of what’s going on. Because of that, I applaud you, Mike. This is all we have. It’s sad that there’s so many people that can’t take a moment and consider all the deaths our little war has caused all around.

By Bobbie

October 26, 2005 09:36 PM | Link to this

Sorry I missed you guys today. I had a dental and doctor’s appt. Boy, entries have really gotten brutal in this blog. I’m just thankful I don’t live next door to James. At least I don’t think I do. It is sad when you cannot disagree without having your patriotism in question. I lost several friends in Viet nam. I wish more people had questioned the war then. I still feel sad over their young lives being cut short and wonder how they would have turned out as adults. Most were just kids. When Mr. Bush reaches the end of his life and is about to face his maker I wonder if his attitude will have changed any. I do not mean this in a sarcastic way so please don’t call me any names. I am just expressing my opinion.

By Darrel

October 26, 2005 09:38 PM | Link to this

Nice post, Don.

By Gene Cassidy

October 26, 2005 10:15 PM | Link to this

Maybe the simpler the question the more complex the answer. Are the Iraqis better off than under Saddam? Is the region better off now that the United States has intervened? Did we have a pressing interest in going to war with Iraq?

When someone we know dies, the best we can do without chancing saying the wrong thing is “I’m so sorry” to the survivors. But in war, why the soldiers died is rightly a matter of contention. A public debate on the rationale for any avoidable death, much less for 2,000, inevitably personally affects parents, children, spouses and friends of the dead.

So in a sense, there’s never a good enough reason why. But looked at another way, serving one’s country in pursuit of its aims — keep in mind a free country’s aims are always the subject of fierce disagreement — is a soldier’s life, and sadly, sometimes death.

By jazz

October 26, 2005 10:22 PM | Link to this

Your cartoon touched me. i was searching for soldiers names to write on my halloween costume, I am gonna paste yours on my back. I am clothed in american flag clothing (not the real flag) and will be blood spattered. In my hand i carry a skull . and on my face the tears of humanity. As a mother of two dead sons, my heart is grieving with the rest of the world. i also want to count the Iraq citizens that have died and suffered.There has to be a better way. Thank you for the painful reminder. Jazz

By Heather

October 26, 2005 10:41 PM | Link to this

Why Mike? Maybe to keep your sorry a* from being bombed over here. Remember 9/11? Why Mike? Maybe to save millions from being exterminated by an evil dictator. Thank GOd you were not around when we were attacking Nazi Germany. After all they didn’t attack us.

By Walter

October 26, 2005 11:01 PM | Link to this

Those who claim that we should fight the fight “over there,” could you please remember that Osama Bin Ladin and Al Qaida were/are in Afganistan, not Iraq. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

By African Loser

October 26, 2005 11:08 PM | Link to this

It’s too late to ask why. This is only a beginning.

By RW-(the original)

October 26, 2005 11:09 PM | Link to this

Walter, I think there is pretty convincing evidence that on 9/11 Al Qaida was over here.

By Walter Hensley

October 26, 2005 11:21 PM | Link to this

Mike, Gore, Kerry, Kennedy and a host of foriegn countries all believed Iraq had WMDs and would give these to terrorists for use in their Jihad. Saddam obviously had WMDs prior to the start of the Iraq war. (Ask the Kurds).We should be still be tracing these missing WMDs. Syria, Iran, other Muslim countries perhaps?

By NTodd

October 26, 2005 11:43 PM | Link to this

Thank you, Mike, for honoring the fallen. How sad that we apparently didn’t heed the lessons that The Wall should’ve taught us.

By Sean

October 26, 2005 11:43 PM | Link to this

I would suggest that Heather @ 10:41 begin a history class and see it through…then maybe she would know that US intervention into WWII only began after almost two years of begging and pleading from the French and English. Oh sure, we offered support vis a vis armor, planes, and tanks, but it wasn’t until the middle of the game that the US became involved begrudgingly. That, my dear, renders your oft-cited talking point useless. So please, spare us all the Nazi references and let’s have an honest and non-biased analytical look at reality.

By NTodd

October 26, 2005 11:47 PM | Link to this

Mike, Gore, Kerry, Kennedy and a host of foriegn countries all believed Iraq had WMDs and would give these to terrorists for use in their Jihad.

No, most foreign countries didn’t believe Saddam had WMD. And the Dems naively belived Bush’s lies.

Saddam obviously had WMDs prior to the start of the Iraq war. (Ask the Kurds).

No, his WMD were destroyed in the wake of the Gulf War and Operation Desert Fox. Ask the Kurds? Jesus, they were gassed when Saddam was our best buddy in the 1980s, which, I’ll note, was before the Gulf War that destroyed his WMD.

Please do try to keep up…

By profmarcus

October 26, 2005 11:48 PM | Link to this

i appreciate the hard work… the sentiment expressed is both powerful and deeply saddening… yes, indeed… why…?

http://www.takeitpersonally.blogspot.com/

By Nads

October 26, 2005 11:50 PM | Link to this

Maybe the wingnuts can do their own cartoon with 25,000 to 100,000 Iraqi civilian names spelling the word “collateral”?

Assuming red starters aren’t too ignorant to spell foreign names.

By V.L.

October 26, 2005 11:50 PM | Link to this

A Beautiful job Mike, and a courageous stance. Keep it up, and maybe some the delusional kool-aid drinkers will treat our soldiers as living breathing people and not their personal bullet sponges.

For those all gung-ho for this fiasco, got a tip for ya:

1-800-GO-Army, I hear they are hiring.

By RW-(the original)

October 26, 2005 11:55 PM | Link to this

Why does everybody keep trying to pimp their blog without linking to it?

NTodd, if all these things were destroyed in Gulf War 1, why did we have sanctions and no-fly zones? Many Gore, Clinton, Kerry quotes are from the 1990’s, do you really think the Governor of Texas was doing mind control experiments?

By Real American

October 26, 2005 11:58 PM | Link to this

WHY?

Because a corrupt and lying administration decided that it would be better to gamble away these beloved brothers and sisters than actually attack the terrorists effectively.

I agree with those of you who say “freedom isn’t free”; it isn’t. We all need to make sacrifices to maintain the integrity of the United States.

But the winner of the War in Iraq is going to be IRAN, not the USA or Iraq.

I believe the highest cost of freedom is being willing to sit down and think about the best ways to solve the most complex issues.

9/11 presented a chalenge to the nation. The military have stepped up, many citizens have stepped up. The Bush administration has been inflexible and blinkered.

Our nation is much worse off that we have invaded and occupied Iraq. It is not the fault of the soldiers, it is the fault of the Bush administration.

Simply put: they have jeopardized our nation’s future and the lives of my beloved family members in the military for NOTHING.

By outing a CIA agent working on WMD proliferation the Bush adminsitration has made our lives MORE dangerous, MORE susceptible to terrorism than ever before.

By Phoenix Woman

October 27, 2005 12:01 AM | Link to this

Very nice, Mike. Thanks.

Now, do fifty more for the 100,000 Iraqis who died as a result of Bush’s playing God.

By Boronx

October 27, 2005 12:01 AM | Link to this

No doubt nearly all of those soldiers died attempting to bring a better life to Iraqis, but the facts are that the war has killed Iraqi civilians at a faster rate than Saddam did, not to mention the hapless conscripts who were slaughtered in the initial invasion, severely damaged the infrastructure, destroyed the economy, pushed the country towards civil war, destroyed American credibility and any worldwide good will we’d accumulated post 9-11, cost hundreds of billions of dollers, strained our military, created the largest terrorists training ground in the world, boosted Al Qaeda recruiting, drew resources at the critical moment from the hunt for bin Laden, distracted attention from others involved in 9/11 attacks like the Saudi’s, and didn’t even cause oil prices to drop.

BTW, has any unprovoked invader in the history of mankind ever ended up on the right side of history?

By scriznik

October 27, 2005 12:03 AM | Link to this

i have to admit, it is still shocking to this day to hear those sound bites from the mouth of rush or scott mcclellan one day and used by millions of americans the next day. it makes sense though, politics can can be daunting and complex, downright intimidating to many. Provide a short and simple sound bite that can be used to confront any detractor to your side and political debate becomes much more manageable. How else can you explain the use of a phrase as blatantly false as “fight them over here so we do not have to fight them here” over and over. Folks, my father is also a middle aged white man who feels disenfranchised and loves these trite sound bites as much as you seem to, but as comforting as they are, their efficacy is a large part of the strategy that is truly hurting our world.

By CD

October 27, 2005 12:14 AM | Link to this

the number of spelling and grammar errors in the responses here would be enough evidence all by itself to any thinking person that we are a nation of fools.

people who think we’re making “progress” in iraq should turn off the TV and read something not published by the American press. seriously- try something from neutral nation, like japan or south africa or germany. you’ll see that the rest of the world understands that the only thing our soliders died to “protect” has to do with KBR and Halliburton profits, and future control of of oil that sits under another nation’s sand.

wake up america, turn off the TV and look around you. record government debt, crumbling schools and roads, no health care for millions, “wal mart” jobs instead of those that can support families- this nation is rotting from the inside out, and we’re throwing away lives and million$ per day in a war no one thinks can be won. all because too many people fall for a chickenhawk and liar with a staff about to get indicted by a grand jury for treason.

why? to make the rich richer. if you’re not rich and you support bush and his war, i pity you.

By Sage

October 27, 2005 12:14 AM | Link to this

This is a powerful work of political art. Thank you for your time and effort and for asking the one question that will haunt this country for many generations because there is no answer that any reasonably thoughtful, sensitive person can accept.

By Boronx

October 27, 2005 12:17 AM | Link to this

I wonder why so many who cry “Remember 9/11” are content that Bush went after one of the few nations in the middle east that didn’t harbor terrorists, and didn’t even pretend to threaten the US.

He couldn’t have picked a worse target if he’d thrown a dart at a map of the region.

By Jeffrey T.

October 27, 2005 12:21 AM | Link to this

Thanks for this powerful image, Mike. For those of you who answer, “so we don’t have to fight them here”, do you remember who attacked us on 9/11? Saudis, not Iraqis. And bin Laden is still a free man. So, we ask you again: WHY?

By Everbody

October 27, 2005 12:28 AM | Link to this

To all the smart asses who have an answer for Mike should contact the families of the listed and repeat that answer to their faces. If you don’t have the guts to do that, then enlist your own tender a* in the military and go fight Bush’s war or tell your sons and daughters to enlist. Put your blood where your beliefs are!

By James

October 27, 2005 12:36 AM | Link to this

Simply awe-inspiring as a tribute. I’m awed.

By John Gillnitz

October 27, 2005 12:52 AM | Link to this

Our country has been screwed ever since the Bush doctrine of empty and senseless bravado replaced the cooler wisdom and proven effectiveness of the Powell doctrine. Since then our troops and their families have shouldered the burden of Bush’s Boondoggle. By definition it is impossible to force people to be free. It is wrong to to invade a sovereign nation that in no way poses a threat. This whole mess is a product of moral cowardice and greed.

By KevinNYC

October 27, 2005 01:16 AM | Link to this

Many, many of our generals, security experts, fighters against terrorism thought the war with Iraq was a bad idea, a distraction in the fight against Al-Qaeda and had several forseeable bad results. Right the best chance we seem to have is the establishment of an Iraqi republic that is aligned with Shiite Iran. Another possibility is a three-way civil war.Some say this has already begun. A worse possibility is a civil war that draws in the other nations in the region. The idea of an Iraqi democracy that is a beacon to the region seems more and more remote. The reason the cartoon asks WHY? is the American people were told Iraq was a direct threat to the US. This was false. It was only after we found no WMD that democracy promotion became the cause. The position of the United States government is now that Saddam had no WMD when we invaded. This is what Charles Duelfer reported. The CIA went back and corrected its estimate

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12115-2004Oct6.html

Negative consequences of this war are it validated Al Qaeda’s propaganda and jihadi recruitment is up around the world. Terrorism attacks have gone up since 9/11 dramatically. Iraq has now become the world center for Islamic terrorism.

Ronald Reagan’s National Security Advisor, Lt. Gen William Odom said this: The invasion of Iraq was the “greatest strategic disaster in United States history.”

http://www.veteransforcommonsense.org/?Page=Article&ID=5000

By KevinNYC

October 27, 2005 01:38 AM | Link to this

Why?

As Knight Ridder reports today: The State of the Union speech was one of a number of instances in which Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and their aides ignored the qualms of intelligence professionals and instead relied on the claims of Iraqi defectors and other suspect sources or, in the case of Niger, the crudely forged documents.

Like the Niger allegation, almost all of the administration’s claims that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had to be ousted before he could develop nuclear, biological or chemical weapons, use them against America or give them to al-Qaida terrorists have turned out to be false. No such weapons or programs have been found, and several official inquiries have concluded that there was no cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaida.

By Susan Walker

October 27, 2005 02:09 AM | Link to this

This (Why?) illustration is fabulous…. I hope the loved ones of the 2000 think “it was worth it.” Those of us who are lucky enough not to be fired upon realize that this is/was a waste of our country’s treasure.

How sad…. And how appalling that these Viet Nam draft-evaders are currently in the “command position.”

If this is such a valid enterprise, why don’t the Bush daughters sign up?!

By Amanda

October 27, 2005 02:49 AM | Link to this

I work for a defense contractor at a US Army base in Germany. Even my right-wing retired officer co-workers are starting to wonder what the hell we’re still doing over there and feel like it’s tearing up the Army. They speak in hushed tones whenever a Reserve member is called up to go “down”.

Afghanistan was right and necessary; it’s unfortunate that our excellent military was not allowed to finish the job properly and get the guy actually responsible for 9/11, but were instead heavily diverted to fight the tragically unnecessary Iraq war.

I believe that our Soldiers and Marines are doing good in Iraq, but if the possibility to do good in a country of oppressed people were the standard for American military intervention, there are several places we should have troops committed (Darfur, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Uzbekistan…)

I know several company-grade officers who had planned military careers but have now decided to retire early, because all they see ahead of them if they stay in the Army is a vast expanse of sand and insurgents, without end.

By Dave

October 27, 2005 04:22 AM | Link to this

I wonder from all the people angry at Mike, if they wonder at all, why haven’t we captured Bin Laden? Aren’t you at all angry that four years later he’s never paid at all for what he did to our country?

Thank you Mike for a poignant question.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 04:52 AM | Link to this

How long will 9/11 be an excuse to wage war? As long as the people who wanted it to happen want to be, I suppose. The “new Pearl Harbor”, conceived by the Project for the New American Century and executed by Americans.

The Gulf of Tonkin was a lie. Conspired by Americans.

Operation Northwoods was conspired by Americans…terrorism and attacks to provoke war with Cuba. McNamara and Kennedy said no, that time.

When those in power in America want to go to war, they know how to frighten and rally the American people into it. They’ve been doing it for generations.

The superpowers of the world, and their crony governments, created terrorism in the world. And the United States has always been the biggest player.

And the people who think it matters whether the perpetrators have been Democrat or Republican…you’re not Americans…you’re partisan lackeys. And unthinking fools.

By Jasper Meer

October 27, 2005 06:38 AM | Link to this

It’s funny how fiscal conservatives have yet to trot out how good of a deal 2000 lives for $200,000,000,000 is. Think about how many more lives we had to spend in Vietnam to make as much money! Our dead armed service member to earnings ratio is much higher for this war.

If that’s not progress, then I don’t know what is. These Borrow and Spend Republicans need to learn how to highlight the positive.

By Kate G

October 27, 2005 07:39 AM | Link to this

A beautiful, important cartoon. And to those who answer with question “why(these deaths)” with trite “because of 9-11” or “because freedom isn’t free” or “someone died to enable you to write your cartoon” I’ll answer with a whole hearted

You are damn right “Freedom isn’t free” and you are damn right that people have died in other wars, and on other streets, for our right to express ourselves politically. But talking about the cost of war is one of those freedoms. Trivializing the cost of this war—oh its only two thousand or you just don’t get dear leader Bush’s great plan for greater mid-east whatever-flavor-explanation-this-week would be a bigger betrayal of our American freedoms, and our democracy, than anything else.

I demand accountability from this president—what was the real reason for this war, and did the country actually assent to the reason given at the time? Given now? Given now that we know that previous reasons were false? If not, the answer can’t be that this “cost” is worth this war.

Kate G

By Elliott

October 27, 2005 07:48 AM | Link to this

Mike, thanks for making this. Really puts it in perspective when you see all the names in one place like that. People really need to start thinking about what’s going on in their world. I think I noticed some of the other commenters still laboring under the illusion that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Until it’s a cause that the Right is willing to send their sons and daughters out to sacrifice for, I don’t want to hear anything from them about how great the cause is and how we should all support it.

By tam

October 27, 2005 07:55 AM | Link to this

The cartoonist could’ve got a much more detailed image if he’d used the 30,000+ names of all those dead iraqis as his building blocks instead.

By maurinsky

October 27, 2005 07:58 AM | Link to this

What I find interesting about those who don’t like the question of “WHY?” is that they don’t seem to realize that we’ve taken essentially the only secular nation in the Middle East - that means the only one that wasn’t led by “Islamofascists” - and through our actions, we’ve increased the power that Islam holds over the people of Iraq. People there are now going to be subject to Sharia - women’s rights in particular are going to be curtailed.

I can’t help but wonder if in 20 years, when the children of those who have lost loved ones to American bombs and bullets are grown and looking at their history, are not going to see the intervention of America not as a saving grace, but as an act of aggression. Gratitude doesn’t always carry from generation to generation, as we can see both from Americans who hate the French even though they saved our asses during the Revolutionary War and from the French who hate America even though we saved their asses in WWII.

Even if a positive democracy does bloom from this war, it has come at a tremendous cost to America - in the lives of our young men and women; in the esteem in which America is held by the rest of the world, who sees the dishonest and disengenous case the Bush administration made for this war; in our moral authority, for using the 9/11 attack to go after a nation that had nothing to do with that attack; and to the soul of America itself, where so many Americans don’t care that their government lied to them.

By tubino

October 27, 2005 08:09 AM | Link to this

Why? So that Iraq could become a terrorist training ground, plausibly taken over (except for Kurdistan) by Al Qaeda.

So that Iran would gain a powerful Shi’ite ally.

So that women could become second-class citizens in Iraq.

By Dwight

October 27, 2005 08:09 AM | Link to this

Good point Tam. I needed to scroll right to the bottom of the page to find any reference to the dead Iraqis. Though I must say, from some sources the number seems to be nearer the 100,000 mark.

By tom durkin

October 27, 2005 08:13 AM | Link to this

The fewer & fewer bushies are circling the wagons, looking more like the OJ jury every day. Reality does not exist for them.

By wtlloyd

October 27, 2005 08:14 AM | Link to this

It’s appalling how ignorant so many Americans are - say, 51% of them….

My heros are healers, not killers.

Where’s Osama? Oh, that’s not important anymore, you say?

By Wild Sects

October 27, 2005 08:29 AM | Link to this

To all of those harping that the majority voted for Bush. Have you checked his poll numbers lately? Many who voted for him wouldn’t likely do it again. Even conservatives have stated recently that if the election was this year Bush wouldn’t stand a chance. People are waking up. Why don’t you all join them?

By KHJFK

October 27, 2005 08:58 AM | Link to this

Why? It was to control the oil. Yes, there will be those who profit, but more importantly, we need the oil to keep our military might on the job. No gas, no world’s only superpower. The poor and hungry who hate America would overwhelm us. The PNAC keeps the wolves (of our making) at bay for another 20-30 years. A deception like Pearl Harbor was needed so it was created, just like Pearl Harbor was needed and created. America rules, or America dies. Wrap your heads around that one, left-nuts and right-nuts.

By dh

October 27, 2005 09:23 AM | Link to this

The anger in some of these comments is striking. Perhaps those folks are experiencing some “buyer’s remorse” for accepting the lies of an Administration full of it? Well, they’re not paying the price—the troops are, the families are, the Iraqi’s are. Why not take your anger and do something constructive for your country? Must you define yourself by your anger and hatred of people who just want peace and justice? I pity you and pray you emigrate ASAP.

By Dwight

October 27, 2005 09:24 AM | Link to this

Hey guys, i wonder what the rest of the world thinks about such a debate. They could be forgiven for thinking that our fellow human beings outside of America simply dont matter.

By dee

October 27, 2005 10:04 AM | Link to this

What does PNAC stand for?

By dee

October 27, 2005 10:09 AM | Link to this

From Dwight: Hey guys, i wonder what the rest of the world thinks about such a debate. They could be forgiven for thinking that our fellow human beings outside of America simply dont matter.

I don’t think they’d think that — Americans are renowned for their generosity and willingess to lend a hand. When the tsunami hit last year, Americans gave billions out of their own pockets for the victims of that disaster. Perhaps what they’d think, and rightly so, is that we are a horrifically divided country right now and our differences are pulling as further and further apart.

By Nimrod Gently

October 27, 2005 10:25 AM | Link to this

Would any of the people banging on about “Freedom isn’t free” and “to protect your sorry a*” kindly explain what this war has to do with freedom and precicely what invading Iraq protects us from?

By Silversmith

October 27, 2005 10:37 AM | Link to this

Nice job, Mike. As an adjunct member of the North Central Chapter of the National Cartoonists Society, I hear a lot about what cartoonists - especially editorial cartoonists - are going through these days. Nice job being honest, man, even knowing your were going to have to deal with the response from the ignorant folks who think they understand the answer, but don’t have a clue.

To those “critics” of Mike’s work, who are obviously heavily both in denial and in Bush’s camp, the following:

1) I’ll believe your “Let’s fight them over there, so we don’t have to fight them over here” crap when you can prove that America removing ourselves from a place we don’t belong would cause religious fundamentalists to leave our country forever. This exercise would include eliminating all the religious fundamentalists who are already here in the U.S., like Tim McVeigh. When you can prove that us being in Iraq has actually made things safer outside of Iraq - for instance, on a double decker bus in London - then you get to keep spouting your slogan. If not, have a nice hot bowl of shut-the-hell-up.

2) To the “Freedom isn’t free” folks, when it’s your son, daughter, husband, wife, etc. whose name is included in Mike’s cartoon, you can speak. Until then, wash your bowl down with a nice hot cup of shut-the-hell-up. Until you’ve made the ultimate sacrifice, you have no room to speak - that includes Gee Duh-Byuh and the Big Dick.

Again Mike, nice job.

By Dave from the Lake Effect Zone

October 27, 2005 10:51 AM | Link to this

Boy, the 101st Fighting Keyboardists are in full force at the AJC today. We did NOT go to Iraq to grow Democracy (TM) in the Middle East (like that’s going to work), to get rid of a nasty tyrant (when are we getting around to deposing Kim Jong-Il?), or any of the dozens of idiotic “reasons” the Bushies floated in an attempt to keep the opposition quiet. We went to Iraq because the Bushies told us that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction which he was either ready to use himself or sell to the first nut from al-Qaida with a suitcase full of cash. THAT, my friends, turned out to be a bald-faced lie, and all the Yellow Elephants posting their “freedom isn’t free” nonsense isn’t going to make it true. It sure isn’t going to validate the deaths of the 2,000 American soldiers who made the ultimate sacrifice for something that, so it turns out, did not exist.

I stand behind people like Mike and Cindy Sheehan when they ask the simple question, “why?” It’s a legitimate question, one the right-wing chickenhawks posting here have chosen to answer by yet another chorus of the same tired horsehockey they’ve been displaying on their car bumpers for the past two and a half years. Your answers are inadequate, unsatisfactory, and insulting to the intelligence of an eight year old. My suggestion to you is, put up or shut up. Go down to your local Army recruiter’s office and put your money where your mouth is. Otherwise, as your hero Bill O’Reilly might say, shut up.

By jasimon

October 27, 2005 10:59 AM | Link to this

Please wake up, America. Just try it one time, for me. Support the president playing god, if you want to, and I’ll try to forgive you for the rude gestures you made to me as I stood silently in front of the CNN building with a sign the said ‘Stop the War - NOW’ and a two-finger peace sign. I guess your offensive behavior was really justified, wasn’t it.

Support our troops by bringing them home ALIVE.

By MrBenchley

October 27, 2005 11:05 AM | Link to this

It’s the question America would like to see answered.

and by the way, nothing demonstrates what a good question it is than the very public cowardice of young Republicans. People like the College Republicans (or the Bush nephews) show no inclination to jump into this dishonest and dishonorable disgrace, and blowhards like Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh don’t even bother to ask their addlepated core of listeners to join up, knowing they have no plans to do so.

If only Republicans spent half as much time and energy going after Osama Bin Laden as they do going after folks like Cindy Sheehan and Mike Luckovich.

By Terriaki

October 27, 2005 11:08 AM | Link to this

Excellent Toon - Thank God for cartoonists and comedians in this country. Through art and humor they state the truth. Why? For a pack of lies.

By FOXwatcher

October 27, 2005 11:08 AM | Link to this

Mike, Why? Because terrorists attacked a humanitarian country and we will defend it, we will provide aid against those threatened by terrorist fools, because the world is safer without terrorism, because 87% percent of the worlds heroine comes from Afganistan (which was stated in Bush’s State of the Union address as a reason for engaging the terrorists), because Saddam Hussien killed massive amounts of harmless people, because the entire world will benefit from the American intolerance of evil at the definitly sorrowful loss of 2,000 brave and heroic American soldiers. That is WHY

By Furrinah

October 27, 2005 11:09 AM | Link to this

Hey James:

I get you. You’re actually an anti-war liberal, posing as a rabid right-winger to make them look bad, aren’t you?

I mean, there’s no way somebody would be so stupid as to THREATEN TO SHOOT PEOPLE OVER POLITICS ON A PUBLIC MESSAGE BOARD!

By Jason

October 27, 2005 11:16 AM | Link to this

In 2040, after the war in Iraq’s gone on for 33 years, with over 20,000 American names to put in the “WHY?”, the AJC will have to switch to a larger format.

By anonymus coward

October 27, 2005 11:19 AM | Link to this

Why? To get the price of oil up. Mission accomplished.

By Gramma Millie

October 27, 2005 11:19 AM | Link to this

To those who say, “Freedom isn’t free,” I ask: Please tell us about the personal sacrifices you’ve been making since 9/11 to “pay” for freedom. This is your chance to correct the impression that for many of you, your actions don’t match your words.

By jasimon

October 27, 2005 11:20 AM | Link to this

Gramma knows.

By Sarah

October 27, 2005 11:22 AM | Link to this

By Mike NotL October 26, 2005 08:14 AM | Link to this …soooo.. how long has Mike L. had this on his drawing board waiting for the 2000th? Do you think he has permission from each of the families to USE their loss for his gain?

Answer me this Mike NotL: Does George W. Bush have permission from every single one of the soldiers who are ordered to sit there and be his backdrop photo-op? I doubt it. You Bush lovers will never understand that lying us into a war that kills any American is a disgusting act and that is why we hate this man, not because he’s a “conservative” (although if running up a huge deficit, having government take away our civil rights, and telling people how to live their lives and what to do with their own bodies makes you a conservative - thank the gods that I am a LIBERAL because I would never want to be associated with the likes of that).

By Sarcasmo

October 27, 2005 11:31 AM | Link to this

Because 200 of those 2,000 dead soldiers would have gotten gay-married someday. So we have to send our American fathers and mothers to Iraq to preserve the family.

Stay the course.

By Sarah

October 27, 2005 11:33 AM | Link to this

I have another “why” question. Why can’t you people who supported Bush admit he and you were wrong, over 2000 now, DEAD WRONG about any of the reasons that were thrown out there for taking this country to war? Why can’t you admit now that the only people benefiting from this war are not the Iraqi people, but the oil industry executives and Halliburton that are making money hand over fist off of this war (can you say Dick Cheney - War Profiteer)? Why is it always the Democrats, liberals, progressives or whatever it is you call us that have to come in and clean up Republican messes? Furthermore, why is the voting public so ignorant as to realize that when you keep voting for this cabal, your sons and daughters get shipped off to die for a lie and your pensions go up in smoke while your medication prices skyrocket and your taxes go up, not down? Why?

By Bryan

October 27, 2005 11:35 AM | Link to this

Another example of the media celebrating the deaths of Americans. Mike you should be ashamed. Do you sit at home and cheer the news when you hear there was another roadside bomb? To all of those who ask why supporters do not sign up, I ask you why you don’t go to Iraq and fight with the terrorists? You support their cause so much here at home but you don’t have the guts to go and do the work yourself. Or does this rationale only apply to those who support America?

By jasimon

October 27, 2005 11:43 AM | Link to this

How very sad and I notice that you Bush lovers won’t respond to my comment about the behavior of your fellow right wingers last night. To die for a lie…Where is the honor in that and where is your humanity.

Sacrifice more, my a*. Name one thing that your president is sacrificing.

By Gramma Millie

October 27, 2005 11:45 AM | Link to this

Bryan Translated: Sure, I could serve my country by signing up for an unpopular war that I full-heartedly support, but I can better serve my country by fighting the Godless heathens over here, on the all-important front line: Internet message boards. By fighting the liberals over here, I won’t have to fight the terrorists over there.

By Greg

October 27, 2005 11:51 AM | Link to this

It’s unfortunate that several commentators here operate under the misguided notions either that Saddam was a threat to Americans or that the war is about “preserving our freedom.”

While I respect your viewpoints, I must disagree. There are a lot of evil dictators out there—Robert Mugabe in the Congo springs to mind—who, although horrible people, don’t threaten our way of life.

They don’t pose a threat to us. We didn’t go to war in Iraq to protect our freedom. It is possible some people in the Bush White House had the best of intentions. I’ll certainly admit that. Some of the neocons genuinely thought that if Saddam was taken out, the Middle East would suddenly become much more open to democracy and Iraq would instantly become It wasn’t just about the oil (although that was a large part of it for some people).

However, a realistic appraisal of the situation could have told them otherwise. For one thing, Iraq has three religious groups at each others’ throats—the Sunnis, the Shiites, the Kurds—none of whom want the others to have any power. Ethnic tensions & hatred dating back centuries. (Iraq’s also not a country which developed naturally, like Canada, or the U.S.—it was thrown together in 1921 like an extremely unwieldypackage.)

They were, unfortunately, living in a fantasyland, and some of those in the White House still live there.

By Bryan

October 27, 2005 11:56 AM | Link to this

Gramma Millie Translated; I could support terrorists by signing up with Al Quaeda instead I will do my best here at home to erode support for American troops. The Iraqi people were much better off when a muderous dictator was in charge. Oh yea, discussion on a message board is “fighting”.

By My $0.02

October 27, 2005 12:32 PM | Link to this

Saddam who?? Have we all forgotton that Saddam was in power since the late 70s? He enjoyed the support of the U.S. for a long time including both Democratic and Republican presidents.

I had never heard of Saddam Hussein until around 1990 when I was 19. All of a sudden, here was this evil dictator who was an imminent threat to our freedom. Since then, and for all of my adult life, I’ve been hearing this rhetoric. In all of that time, he never attacked or verbally threatened to attack the U.S. Maybe he would have at some point and maybe he wouldn’t, but it’s ridiculous to think that a tiny third-world country like Iraq could ever completely bring the largest military power that ever existed to its knees.

Unless that power imposed its occupation on an already-oppressed people with nothing to lose…. What would you do if some other country’s troops were patrolling the streets of Atlanta, for example?

No need to ask “WHY?”, Mike. Nobody’s celebrating these 2000 deaths, Bryan.

By Gramma Millie

October 27, 2005 12:33 PM | Link to this

Bryan, since you believe I’m pro-terrorist and anti-American, why do you want me to go fight the terrorists? I mean, if I’m supporting them, I won’t be giving them much of a battle over there, will I? You send a liberal like me, the next thing you know the terrorists will be in your back yard, dude! Would seem to make a lot more sense to send a Bonafide True American — a John Wayne type, just like you! Just for example, you could probably show them your Pro Troops Magnet, and those terrorists will just shrivel up and die!

By John Hayes

October 27, 2005 12:44 PM | Link to this

Mike, disagree with the war all that you want. But why bring these honorable fallen soldiers into such a dishonorable use of their names? A political cartoon? They deserve to be remembered and honored for their service, not used as political cannon fodder by people like you. John Hayes Camilla, Ga.

By Dave from the Lake Effect Zone

October 27, 2005 12:47 PM | Link to this

Bryan Translated; I could support terrorists by signing up with Al Quaeda instead I will do my best here at home to withhold my support for American troops by sitting on my a** eating Cheetos and posting garbage to meesage boards. The Iraqi people were much better off when a muderous dictator was in charge, but who cares so long as I can buy gas for my monster truck. Oh yea, “discussion” on a message board is as close as I’ll ever get to actual fighting.

By Darryl Pearce

October 27, 2005 01:21 PM | Link to this

Why?? Because that’s where the bad guys are. Duh. Would you rather fight them over here?

World Trade Center Oklahoma City Atlanta Olympics

We’ve been fighting them “over here” ALREADY….

By Bill O'Liely

October 27, 2005 01:22 PM | Link to this

SHUT UP! SHUT UP! SHUT UP!

Aren’t I a great journalist…

By Sean

October 27, 2005 01:25 PM | Link to this

Claiming liberals are celebrating the 2000th death…so those old men on top of the Arazona Memorial every Dec. 7th are celebrating the deaths of American sailors?

Yeah…that’s what I thought.

By Sean

October 27, 2005 01:30 PM | Link to this

Correction - Arizona

By alan long

October 27, 2005 01:33 PM | Link to this

YOur “cartoon” is in very bad taste. We are fighting a war without borders and during this time of conflict we as country should stand together in support of our President and soldiers. To answer your question “WHY?” As one WW II veteran told me, “freedom is not free”. As a parent I know some of this as I said good bye to my son this week;for this next year he will proudly serve as a soldier assisting a country desiring to be free from tyranny as well as defending our country in the mountains and deserts of Iraq.

By jasimon

October 27, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

Sorry, Alan…and I hope your son comes home alive…but you really have to give me a break with that ‘assisting a country desiring to be free’ b******.

Oh, yeah, I forgot that’s the latest reason for why we’re over there.

Wake UP, America. You are being PLAYED.

By Gabriel

October 27, 2005 01:41 PM | Link to this

Excellent cartoon. Will become a classic in history books for sure.

Downing Street memo is a must read for anyone who are against this cartoon (and don’t quote Limbaugh to say it’s a fake - he bases his facts on his own opinions).

And for those who think Mike used these fallen soldiers for his own profit, you should take a step back and realise he’s using their names (representation) while the government used their lives (concrete). What’s worse? Seems you also need to think in communication terms, not in political terms only.

By Bobbie

October 27, 2005 01:42 PM | Link to this

We have three years and 65 days left of this bungled presidency. Would you republicans try to pick better next time since you say the democrates can’t produce anyone worthy to lead this great nation. Please do your homework and try to choose better canidates.

By a_retrogrouch

October 27, 2005 01:46 PM | Link to this

Wow, isn’t it great to be President? You can order the U.S. military to invade a country that had nothing to do with 9/11, spend more than $200 billion of other people’s money to do so, kill more than 2,000 U.S. troops and over 100,000 Iraqis to do so, burn up the credibility of the U.S., alienate virtually every other government on the planet, and sell out the CIA and the rest of our federal government like the Soviets used to do. Yes, it’s good to be King…

By Salsa

October 27, 2005 01:47 PM | Link to this

I thought freedom was just another word for nothing else to lose.

Isn’t it kind of cowardly of the U.S. to take our fight to a 3rd world country that had nothing to do with the 9/11 attacks? I don’t feel real good about being part of 100,000 Iraqis’ deaths just so we can keep the fight “over there”.

By Jay

October 27, 2005 01:58 PM | Link to this

Just thought I would throw a question out there…

True, WMD have not been found except for the couple of liters Sarin. Does it necessarily mean that since they have not been found, that they never existed?

Since Iraq had plenty of time to prepare once they knew we would be coming, would they not try to hide or move these weapons(to Syria or buried in the desert somewhere) before we actually got there? We know that Saddam tried to steal all the money out of the banks and move it to Syria.

By dee

October 27, 2005 02:01 PM | Link to this

Mike, disagree with the war all that you want. But why bring these honorable fallen soldiers into such a dishonorable use of their names? A political cartoon? They deserve to be remembered and honored for their service, not used as political cannon fodder by people like you. John Hayes Camilla, Ga.

Then Why can’t we take pictures of their caskets coming home? And WHY doesn’t anyone in the current administration go to the airport to welcome them home? This was done in the Johnson administration as well as the Nixon administration (VietNam), and also the FIRST Bush’s administration, (Desert Storm), but WHY can’t it be done now?

By Dave from the Lake Effect Zone

October 27, 2005 02:01 PM | Link to this

Jay - what couple liters of sarin are you talking about?

By Vinton81

October 27, 2005 02:04 PM | Link to this

Bandying the word “freedom” around from a completely American perspective is meaningless… freedom means different things to different people… what does it mean to maniacs like Bin Laden? to Palestinians in the West Bank? to Iraqi sunni men who have lost jobs and family? I am not saying I support any of their tactics… but to spout off about “freedom isnt free” is simply mindless… everything has a context and obviously many Iraqi’s want to be free of foreign troops running their country…some of them will want to be free of Shiite sharia law soon as well!

I was against this war from the start because strategically it was bound to be a disaster, whoever thought that it could then be made so worse by the complete mismanagement of a group of liars and downright fools in the White House and Pentagon? richard clarke was interviewed last night on NPR and summed it up quite well… Iran is the big winner… they have gotten everything they wanted ..Saddam is removed, there are no WMD to threaten them with Saddam, they have a Shiite majority government that thinks like them in place that they have close relations with… and they have an Islamic populace from Pakistan to Tunisia that is now more than 80% anti-American because of this war. And Sadly Iran got this paid for with 200 to 300 billion in USA taxpayer dollars… and more sadly the deaths of many fine Americans…

Why indeed?

By Shane

October 27, 2005 02:07 PM | Link to this

Because freedumb isn’t free! We just had to fight for it, quit asking me why and making me think, you’re making my head hurt. Besides, dissent is treason. I know, I know, the original argument was about WMD, and that wasn’t anywhere to be found. We can’t dwell on the past now, we must move on. Troops are on the ground now, and we need to show support. The message is that you should say whatever you have to say to get a war started, and we will feel obligated to keep it going. That’s just how it is. Don’t think we won’t get you later on for lying! In the meantime, let’s blow some limbs around! WooHoo! You know, you should go over there and freedomize something, then see if you ask why. Take a freedom bullet, put it in your freedom gun, and send some freedom into someone. Maybe you can get some freedom in you, too. Then, you can come home and vote. Yep. Haven’t you heard? Ever since Iraq threatened our freedom, of course we couldn’t vote or speak freely, but since we went over there and fought to keep us free, the Iraqis were forced to stop screwing with our democratic processes, and we are free once again. Go Freedom! Fly on, oh proud Eagle!

By dee

October 27, 2005 02:08 PM | Link to this

*True, WMD have not been found except for the couple of liters Sarin. Does it necessarily mean that since they have not been found, that they never existed?

Since Iraq had plenty of time to prepare once they knew we would be coming, would they not try to hide or move these weapons(to Syria or buried in the desert somewhere) before we actually got there? We know that Saddam tried to steal all the money out of the banks and move it to Syria.*

The Air Forces of both Great Britan and the US as well as the satellites above have tried and tried to find those WMD’s. There just weren’t any. Has anyone ever considered that maybe Saddam wanted everyone to think he had WMD’s so as to keep Syria and Iraq off his butt? If Syria or Iraq had known that there were no possibilities of their getting fried by S.H. they would’ve invaded and taken control years ago. Also, don’t forget S.H. actually stabilized the region and we were all for that for 25+ years. Who do you think originally gave him the silos and the capabilities to have nuclear weapons?

By Korry

October 27, 2005 02:12 PM | Link to this

America rules, or America dies.

It’s really sad that you see those as the only options. Maybe a sustainable future isn’t possible, forever. Maybe when the ice sheets collapse and the global climate irrevocably changes for the worse, it will all be moot anyway.

I probably won’t live to see the worst, but I would rather leave this world knowing my country behaved with integrity, ethics and morality and used it’s power to try and develop a global cooperative solution.

I guess that’s the difference between a sociocentric like you, and an idealist/optimist like me.

By Chris

October 27, 2005 02:15 PM | Link to this

There are many people who post here who refuse to admit that the Dems or Repubs do anything right. It seems that to them only their side is right or intelligent. Those of you who post like that lose credibility by refusing to admit that your side might be wrong in some instances. This kind of arguing does nothing good for the political discourse in our country but I guess it makes you feel good at least.

By Why, indeed

October 27, 2005 02:18 PM | Link to this

Regarding the “fight them over there, so we don’t fight them over here” talking point: We are fighting them over here, buddy and if you don’t know that you haven’t been to DC, or NY, or on an airplane lately. Wake up, fighting them over there, ie. let’s kill as many Arabs as we can, because Republicans think they are all out to get us is backfiring and now we are in more danger than before. Iraq didn’t attack us, what does fighting them over there, rather than over here have to do with Iraq, again they didn’t attack us.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 02:20 PM | Link to this

PNAC = Project for the New American Century. They have a website at www.newamericancentury.org. Founded by Bill Kristil, has included Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle and others. It’s pretty much THE neocon ideological think tank. Heavily Zionist influenced, pretty much developed our current global domination/foreign policy.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 02:22 PM | Link to this

Why,indeed…probably one of the worst posts I have seen on here and that is saying alot. Do you really think Republicans want to kill as many Arabs as possible? C’mon man, how about some intellectual honesty. And it was the Islamic militants who said they wanted to kill as many Americans as possible, lets keep that in mind. If we are fighting them in Iraq that is better than in the streets of DC or Atlanta isn’t it?

By winker

October 27, 2005 02:24 PM | Link to this

Nice work it is a question that needs to be asked more.

By Ok make that $0.03

October 27, 2005 02:25 PM | Link to this

Although it may take away from my earlier comment, does it really matter when/where/if/why Saddam had WMDs?

Mike’s cartoon was not about the strategic implications of the Bush administration’s policy, it was about reflection upon the death of our troops, and we should bring the discussion back around to that. Nobody at the vigil I went to last night was “celebrating” that 2000 soldiers were dead. The mood was very somber and respectful as a matter of fact. Kind of like a funeral.

“Why?” is a common question to ask when coping with the death of a loved one, even if it’s due to natural causes. I’m sure many of the loved ones of these troops are asking “why? [did it have to be my son/daughter/spouse]” whether or not they support the Bush policy.

By dee

October 27, 2005 02:30 PM | Link to this

Thanks Korry!! The PNAC sounds like of spooky though — just in time for Halloween. I think I’ll dress my kids up as a PNAC!

By Cecil Foster

October 27, 2005 02:31 PM | Link to this

One thing this blog has established is,Texas and Washington D.C. aren’t the only places in the USA where testosterone overcomes intelligence.

By dee

October 27, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

Thanks Korry!! The PNAC sounds kind of spooky though � just in time for Halloween. I think I’ll dress my kids up as a PNAC!

(Guess it would help if I learned how to complete a sentence articulately!!)

By Korry

October 27, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

As far as the PNAC and our quest for the domination of the world’s remaining resources, the US and Israel may be able to dominate and re-shape the Middle East to suit our agenda, but sooner or later we’re going to come up against China and the rest of Asia in a struggle for those resources. Not long after that, I imagine most of the people on the planet can bend over and kiss their asses goodbye.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 02:38 PM | Link to this

Actually, Ricky, your government keeps telling you that Arabs want to kill as many Americans as possible. And we all know they never lie.

So much for intellectual honesty.

By John Petrick

October 27, 2005 02:42 PM | Link to this

Mike

I was a little bitter about your cartoon? WHY.

Since I thought about and read some comments from US soldiers about it, I have decided to send my comment.

I have come to the conclusion as everyone else that the reason for the cartoon, in my opinion, is to make money for you. The more contraversal, the more negative or positive opinions you get, the more your popularity increases.

As an ex armed forces member, if my son or daughters name was in the WHY, I would be talking to an attorney.

Just my opinion.

Regards

By Korry

October 27, 2005 02:56 PM | Link to this

Waging war for essentially economic reasons, war profiteering, attempting to dominate world resources, violating domestic and international law in the process…that’s all perfectly acceptable to the hawks.

But using the names of fallen soldiers in something that quetions those values, and that might result in some modicum of economic gain…that’s just despicable to the hawks.

Mike’s tax dollars contributed to the process that has resulted in the death of his countrymen. He has every right to name them, in the expression of his perception. That someone thinks they can take that to court, for some monetary gain, and that that would be some kind of moral or heroic stand, is ridiculous.

The moral stand that might actually hold up is families of the fallen suing the war profiteers who had influence in the decision to wage war.

I’ve rarely witnessed such a blatant display of egocentricity and hypocrisy.

By Mark

October 27, 2005 03:04 PM | Link to this

FOXwatcher…so now Iraq is part of the war on drugs? Puhleeeeze! If that’s the case watch out Colombia, Thailand, Peru, Nigeria, and Mexico! Here we come. So since there were no WMDs…. Just another pitiful spinmeister trying to justify a war that is becomming more hard to justify with each passing day..

By Mark

October 27, 2005 03:32 PM | Link to this

Thank you Korry. You nailed it. Of course I am shocked that a neo-con would want to sue Mike for excercizing his 1st Amendment right to freedom of speech. Actually the guy must be a closet liberal since we all know, because GW says so, that only liberal Democrats would support trial lawyers in such a way.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 03:43 PM | Link to this

So Korry, the repeated tapes and messages seen on Al-Jeerza of radical Islamists preaching about the destruction of Israel and America are all fake? You say that its the gov’t telling me that? You don’t believe those tapes being shown on Al-Jeerza? And Korry just becuase some of the members of PNAC are Jewish doesn’t make the organization Zionist.

By jazz

October 27, 2005 03:45 PM | Link to this

All the b****** in the world will not disguise the amount we are willing to squander on human life and newspaper cartoons. Those cartoons are not free. Money changing hands is the capitalist model. Stop the God Bless America crap and get real its always about money. Try not going to work and pay the IRS see how America stands by you. By the way read your sacred book and see where Jesus falls on this subject. Its a F—kin’ shame someone has to p** you off to get you to do something, even if its just writing about things you know nothing about. You’re all pathetic.

By JerseyShore

October 27, 2005 03:48 PM | Link to this

I’ve never seen anybody more gullible than the neocons. “WMDs.” “9/11.” “Mission Accomplished.” “Bring it on.” “We’re fighting for Iraqi freedom.” Lie after lie after lie.

And I notice all the cheerleaders - Cheney, Rove, Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly, etc. - have never served a day in the armed forces.

Cowards.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 03:50 PM | Link to this

Well, Ricky, I really have to question your intellectual honesty. When they talk about the “destruction” of the US and Israel, they’re talking about confronting imperialist policies of apartheid, oppression and domination. They’re not talking about the anihilation of the people who live in there.

The anti-Palestinian, anti-Muslim, anti-Arab propaganda that has been generated in and from the US and Israel for decades is prolific, misleading and biased.

And just because policies are Zionist, doesn’t mean the people who are supporting the policies are Jewish. Religion is beside the point. That the US gives more financial aid to Israel every year ($3-5 billion annually), than all other foreign and global emergency aid combined, pretty much indicates that our government supports and promotes Zionism, as does the PNAC.

By andzia

October 27, 2005 03:52 PM | Link to this

Thank you for a powerful statement. These American soldiers deserved to live to their potential not die for lies. Our country owes it to our military to keep them from harm’s way and only to use force as a last resort. Editorials such as yours are helping to create the winds of change.

By Outraged

October 27, 2005 03:55 PM | Link to this

Why? So morons like you can have the freedom to ask stupid questions and not get your head cut off.

By Matt

October 27, 2005 03:58 PM | Link to this

JerseyShore, since you are calling out the Reps that haven’t served lets inventory the Dems. Yes we all know Kerry served, but he voted for the war. Clinton, both Bill and Hillary, Howard Dean, Harry Reid, Michael Moore, Al Franken, Nancy Pelosi, Dick Durbin, Al Sharpeton, Jesse Jackson, never served either.

By David

October 27, 2005 04:00 PM | Link to this

Hey Korry why don’t you enlighten us as to the decades long “imperialist policies of apartheid, oppression and domination” shown against the Arab world. Please give us some factual evidence so we don’t take you for what I suspect you really are………

By scriznik

October 27, 2005 04:03 PM | Link to this

i think that it is worth repeating some ideas not so explicitly stated before in this thread, if you believe that this war is anything but a great deception by this administration in order to make money, yes, solely money, for themselves and their corporate buddies, you truly are deluded. Why would these businessmen put themselves in such a position of power. it is very very easy to see, Iraq is truly one of the worst engagements we could have made if we wanted to reduce terrorism in the world (i.e that argument is really no good), helping a downtrodden population, you do not have to look far for a more appropriate population. If you let your passions go for a moment and really ask the question WHY…. it is the same reason for everything else that happens in this country as of late….to make the wealthy wealthier, end of story. Our sons and daughters DIED for that reason alone.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 04:07 PM | Link to this

Korry, do you really have a problem with us giving aid to our one ally in the Middle East? Our government supports Isreal not Zionism, there is a difference. And do you really think that the Islamist extremists don’t want to kill as many Americans and Jews as they can? Their methods are not by political movement, they are by suicide bombers and terrorism. From your comments I can tell that you are heavily Pro-Palestinian which colors your views on both Isreal and America’s policy to the Arab World, so I don’t think I will change your mind, I just don’t want you to go uncontested in your claims about how America is oppressing the Arab World and how we are using tons of propoganda to infuelence peoples views.

By David

October 27, 2005 04:11 PM | Link to this

scriznik, please don’t bore us with nonsence. Look at the facts before the war, look at what the inspectors said, look at what the bi-partisan senate comission said, look at what kerry, clinton, and many other senators said……Jesus get off the kool-aid already and think for yourself

By Matt

October 27, 2005 04:14 PM | Link to this

Scriznik, do you really believe the reason for the war was to make people money? I can understand people questioning the war and the management of it, those are legitimate questions but to say that the war was started for solely monetary reasons is nothing more than a conspiracy theory

By Korry

October 27, 2005 04:15 PM | Link to this

David, you comment is even worth responding to. If you’ve studied the actual history of Palestine and Israel, and not just bought into the propaganda, then you know what I’m talking about.

Ricky, support of the state of Israel as a separatist Jewish state is Zionism. Look it up. The US government’s support of Israel is Zionist support of the Middle East extension of the US military industrial complex. There is no difference between support of the conservative government of Israel and Zionism.

The use of terrorism by Palestinian and other Arab groups is in response to occupation, and the use of terrorism against them.

That’s what I really think.

By Cecil

October 27, 2005 04:17 PM | Link to this

I know everyone on all sides of the war issue always makes it a point to show support for the troops. But I don’t. I don’t care particularly for the troops. I know this will not be a popular opinion, but I cannot help truly meaning it.

The vast majority of those who join the military are easily manipulated and have a hard time focusing. Bad grades in school, dim civilian career prospects and a promise of a meaningful life in the Army attract them to the military. They are by definition prime subjects for mild forms of brain-washing. Whether they approve or not of this President and of this war is of no importance to me. They are trained and hired killers, nothing more.

So let’s not make this debate about what the military’s worth and what the soldiers think. The point is, this adminsitration lied to make its case for the war. I do believe that intervention in Iraq was necessary, but we should have done a better job at convincing other nations to join us. There were several other options to use before an armed invasion of the country. If any of these options would have be used, we wouldn’t have a debate right now about 2000 American soldiers.

By Mike

October 27, 2005 04:23 PM | Link to this

Cecil, wow, you trash our troops basically saying the are stupid. I would bet that 99% of them are brighter than you and contribute a great deal more to society than you.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this

Also, I think that there are Muslim/Palestinian groups that perpetrate acts of terrorism in the Middle East, in retaliation to their occupiors.

I think the terrorist acts that occur in other parts of the world, that are blamed on Muslim terrorist groups are more likely perpetrated by US, Israeli, and British intel groups, to incite hate against the Muslims/Palestinians/Arabs.

For example, 9/11 and the London bombings. And that’s what I really think.

By Mike

October 27, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this

Cecil, wow, you trash our troops basically saying they are stupid. I would bet that 99% of them are brighter than you and contribute a great deal more to society than you.

By Mark G.

October 27, 2005 04:29 PM | Link to this

Why? Oil, Halliburton, Hubris, Arrogance, Stupidity, and an Administration Chock-full of Chickenhawks, for starters.

Fortunately, the corpse of George W. Bush’s failed presidency is presently rotting away in the desert of Iraq.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 04:33 PM | Link to this

Korry, the more you talk the more far out we see that you really are. Based on your statements, it would seem that you believe that there would be no terrorism if Isreal had not been created as a nation-state. To say the Western intelligent agencies are conducting terrorist attacks is just a conspiracy theory at best.

By scriznik

October 27, 2005 04:38 PM | Link to this

you may think that pointing to monetary gain as the reason for this war is a conspiracy theory, but i think that all of the evidence pretty clearly pints to just that. if you look at the amount of corruption in our government right now, i think we already have a good deal of evidence at how far our institutions have fallen from their purpose of protecting citiznes. Explain the actual passage of laws that protect businesses while they pollute our environment leading to possible nightmarish climate change. Any sane civilization would move away from this energy source, why don’t we …corruption. the oil indusrty and Eisenhower’s parting warning: the military industrial complex are actually in power (ie in the white house), the first to maintain its existence as that itself begins to make no sense (without the oil industry, do you think we would even have this problem with islamic terrorism, honestly). the second, to create profit by creating wars. i wish i could bet my medical school loans on what the history books will say, because the result of unbridled corporate corruption is and will go down in the books as a large driving force behind thi war.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 04:42 PM | Link to this

Well, like most of America, Ricky, anything that’s contrary to the propaganda you’ve been fed is a “conspiracy theory”. It’s not as if the “official stories” have ever been proven, or ever will be. Some of them can’t possibly be, in light of the enormous amount of evidence that refutes them.

But whatever your government and the media says must be true, of course. Accepting that is just so much easier than thinking, and actually engaging in intellectual honesty, isn’t it?

You’re entitled to your opinion, and your ignorance. Though I’m not sure what you mean by “we”.

By Scott

October 27, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

Let me tell you how “gung ho” I was about the US taking down Saddam Hussein. It was the thing to do. I thought. I was a staunch Republican. Little did I know that it would hit close, very close to home. I lost my cousin in Ramadi last December due to a roadside bomb. Loosing a family member, who was like my brother, puts a whole new spin on things. You can never imagine how trivial this Iraq thing is until you lose a family member. Now all I can think of is which family is next to bear the horrible reality of a stupid war. What family has to bear the brunt of somone else’s decision. My cousin Todd Gibbs 37, left a wife and two children behind. He also left a family still grieving to this day almost a year later. http://www.militarycity.com/valor/548951.html

By scriznik

October 27, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

and for the record david.. inspectors found nothing and stated just that. kerry, clinton, et al were covering their admittledly sorry arses with a public that at the time was eating up all that bush had to say (truly the kind of weak democratic leadership this country does not need).

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 04:49 PM | Link to this

Korry, first of all, there is no real evidence that Western intelligence agencies are carrying out terroritst attacks to pit people against Arabs. I do my own research into contorversial topics, I look at multiple sources. And you didn’t answer any of my questions. Don’t know if you saw yesterday that the Iranian President called for the annihilation of Israel. Or was that propaganda put out by our media

By David

October 27, 2005 04:50 PM | Link to this

of course no facts from the anti semitic jew hater / kool-aid drinker Korry just as I suspected……..and as far as zionism what about the million or so Jews forsed to flee homes and property in arab lands, are we tom think arabs would welcome them……no I don’t think rational people can expect any such thing, A million arabs live now in Israel yet Jews canm not live in arab lands yet the Jews are rasists…….hows that for logic?

By David

October 27, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this

to all you people making these wild claims………….back it up or shut-up……….facts are reality not some air america, left wing america hating web site, get your FACTS out and lets debate, otherwise………….p** off

By Korry

October 27, 2005 05:03 PM | Link to this

David…look up the “facts” yourself, you lazy a*. Anyone who buys everything they are fed by this current secretive, manipulative administration are the Kool-Aid drinkers. But just keep plying your partisan spin to make your delusions reality.

I can Google and link with the best of them, but that’s completely pointless when in a message board discussion with partisan hacks who think they already own the “facts”. I don’t buy into your condescending baiting any more than any other intelligent, competent thinking adult would.

By scriznik

October 27, 2005 05:04 PM | Link to this

david, what facts do you have? the support of congress does not validate a war when the political life of those in congress was cleary at risk of they opposed it (and they are very self-interested public servants on the whole). How about the evidence coming out about the intentional lies of this administration used to get us there (ie documents about niger and uranium). what i hear from you is that anger coming from white men who feel disenfranchised that was so brilliantly manipulated and used by Rove’s media machine (yes rush, hannity, et al). One thing i will give you, the way they blatantly appeal to that anger to achieve their diabolicol ends is highly impressive, it is just too bad we do not have minds like that fighting for good. the problem is, good people are usually not hungry for power and wealth, and thus the powerful are usually far from good people.

By RobM

October 27, 2005 05:06 PM | Link to this

Let’s just hope that we end this travesty of a war ends before the talented Mike Luckovich is called to draw his “WHY OH WHY?” editorial cartoon.

One last thing… for all the war supporters out there: are you saying that this great country, the United States of America, with its seemingly endless capabilities, creativity, and resources is unable to come up with a better response to the evil that exists in this world than by sacrificing thousands upon thousands upon thousands of innocent lives? Surely we have more to offer the world than death and destruction!

By Korry

October 27, 2005 05:09 PM | Link to this

Dr. David Ray Griffin listed ten characteristics of the WTC collapses which all indicate that the buildings did not fall due to being struck by planes or the ensuing fires. He explained the buildings fell suddenly without any indication of collapse. They fell straight into their own footprint at free-fall speed, meeting virtually no resistance as they fell—a physical impossibility unless all vertical support was being progressively removed by explosives severing the core columns. The towers were built to withstand the impact of a Boeing 707 and 160 mile per hour winds, and nothing about the plane crashes or ensuing fires gave any indication of causing the kind of damage that would be necessary to trigger even a partial or progressive collapse, much less the shredding of the buildings into dust and fragments that could drop at free-fall speed. The massive core columns—the most significant structural feature of the buildings, whose very existence is denied in the official 9/11 Commission Report—were severed into uniform 30 foot sections, just right for the 30-foot trucks used to remove them quickly before a real investigation could transpire. There was a volcanic-like dust cloud from the concrete being pulverized, and no physical mechanism other than explosives can begin to explain how so much of the buildings’ concrete was rendered into extremely fine dust. The debris was ejected horizontally several hundred feet in huge fan shaped plumes stretching in all directions, with telltale “squibs” following the path of the explosives downward. These are all facts that have been avoided by mainstream and even most of the alternative media. Again, these are characteristics of the kind of controlled demolitions that news people and firefighters were describing on the morning of 9/11. Those multiple first-person descriptions of controlled demolition were hidden away for almost four years by the City of New York until a lawsuit finally forced the city to release them. Dr. Griffin’s study of these accounts has led him beyond his earlier questioning of the official story of the collapses, to his above-quoted conclusion: The destruction of the three WTC buildings with explosives by US government terrorists is no longer a hypothesis, but a fact that has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt.

~ from 911citizenswatch.org

Much of the “official” story of 9/11 has been proven. Yet it’s “accepted” because it’s what the world was told by our government and our media.

Your definition of “fact” is what you’ve been told. Evidence does not support those facts. That’s truth. Nothing has been “proven”. Why was it not fully investigated? It wasn’t.

And that is WHY every citizen on the planet has the right to ask WHY?, until a real investigation is done, and there are answers that make sense.

About 9/11, about the war in Iraq, and about everything else.

By Joakim

October 27, 2005 05:11 PM | Link to this

It’s incredible how ignorant and easily led some americans (50%?) can be. The fact that some actually use the term “bad guys” like this was a movie. What planet are you on anyway?

From Europe with pity.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 05:11 PM | Link to this

“Much of the “officialâ€? story of 9/11 has been proven” should read “has NOT been proven.”

Sorry.

By Joakim

October 27, 2005 05:13 PM | Link to this

Sorry, I meant to write Earth, not Europe. I’m in Europe, but that’s not the point.

By Joakim

October 27, 2005 05:16 PM | Link to this

Lot of spelling mistakes going on :)

If you want answers, let Google give you some ;)

Go to www.google.com, type in “failure” and press the “I’m feeling lucky” button. Check out what Google defines as failure!

By khjfk

October 27, 2005 05:17 PM | Link to this

PNAC is the neocon organization, Plan for a New American Century. Google up their site, they tell you what they’re doing. “America rules or America dies” isn’t my formulation , but theirs. Realistically, the chance for world peace has been diminishing with each person that starves for want in a world of plenty, while 8% of the world’s population consumes 50% of the world’s resources. I’m not happy about the Plan but it would be very hard to hope for forgiveness now. And those who go on about how the Islamic world wants to kill us all should read about Iran under the Shah, or the treatment of Palestinians by Israel, and ask how they would like it. Fact: The Shah’s secret police were taught the fine art of torture by former Gestapo flown in by the U.S. CIA. Not many Americans bother to know this, but you can bet every Iranian does. And so on and so forth….

By Jim

October 27, 2005 05:22 PM | Link to this

I know this has been said several times by other posters in response to the “because-of-9/11” crowd but they apparently don’t get it. So, I’ll repeat it one more time and say it very sloooooooooowly:

Iraq… had… NOTHING… to… do… with… the… attacks… on… 9/111. PERIOD.

Your revenge-for-9/11 AKA fight-‘em-over-there mantra is hogwash.

Get a clue. Stop regurgitating the spewing heads of FauxNews and Dubya.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 05:34 PM | Link to this

I feel sorry for you Korry if you really believe that our own government would kill 3000 of our own citizens by emplacing exploves in the World Trade Center. Just becuase one person wrote an article about it, doens’t make it fact. Louis Farrakhan said that the levees were blown in order to kill poor black people. Do you believe that Korry?

By Korry

October 27, 2005 05:57 PM | Link to this

Yes, Ricky, I really believe it. And I don’t think your feelings could compare to how sorry I feel for people who refuse to look at the evidence gathered by many people. That was based on a speech given by doctor Griffin, to thousands of people, with the help of many people who gathered evidence.

50% of the people in NYC agree with the real evidence. 63% of the people in Canada do.

The real truth may not come out for a long time. We have a Congress that’s helping to serve the Kool-Aid right now. Methinks David would have a brown shirt in Nazi Germany, and you would have “just taken orders.”

It’s not the first time in history something so “unbelievable” has happened. Unfortunately, it probably won’t be the last.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 06:05 PM | Link to this

So, Korry according to you 50% of people in NYC believe that our own government blew up the WTC buildings? Where did you get that info? And who is Dr Griffin? And just becuase I don’t believe you doesn’t mean I just listen to whatever is said on the news. I believe that America is the greatest country in the history of the Earth. Obviously you don’t. That is fine, that is your opinion. But that doesn’t mean that I think you just repeat talking points and proganda like you accuse me of. We can have an honest debate and agree to disagree. I believe the evidence is with me, not you. And if the government orchestrated these attacks were the voice recordings on the plane that crashed into the field in Pennslyvania a hoax? Is this all one big cover up to make the Arabs look bad? Was is all part of the Zionist trying to take over the world?

By Korry

October 27, 2005 06:09 PM | Link to this

Ricky, the fact that you feel the need to express how “sorry” you feel for anyone who doesn’t agree with you, and that you need to question other people’s “intellectual honesty” pretty much indicates that you don’t respect other’s opinon and input if it differs from yours, and that you use condescending tactics to try and “win” the argument. I don’t have much respect for your style.

I don’t believe there is a “greatest country in the world.” I believe we’re part of the world, and no better or worse than any other part of it, and we really need to find a way to behave accordingly.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 06:12 PM | Link to this

The 50% of NYC info is from a Zogby poll. The info about it can be found at the Zogby site, or at the 911 site I already named.

By dee

October 27, 2005 06:15 PM | Link to this

I feel sorry for you Korry if you really believe that our own government would kill 3000 of our own citizens by emplacing exploves in the World Trade Center. Just becuase one person wrote an article about it, doens’t make it fact. Louis Farrakhan said that the levees were blown in order to kill poor black people. Do you believe that Korry?

Not to validate or disclaim any comments about the WTC, 9/11, or Farrakhan, our government is KNOWN to cover up a controversy or a bad decisions with lies…….remember Watergate? How about the The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment? The U.S. government’s 40-year experiment on black men with syphilis.

For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness and their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all.

The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate from syphilis.

I can’t think of anymore off the top of my head, but bet if I got to Ask Jeeves, about a dozen or more examples exactly like this will pop up. Just stating facts on what this country IS capable of and what they HAVE done in the past.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 06:15 PM | Link to this

Korry, you still didn’t answer my questions? So all countries are equal? Do you think the US was better than Nazi Germany or Pol Pot’s Cambodia or do you believe in moral equivalency? When I question someones intellectual honesty it is only because they are repeating other posts and not coming up with unique material. I would like to hear your answers though.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 06:18 PM | Link to this

And if you’re really interested in the plausible theories of what really happened on 9/11, based on the actual available evidence, there are places all over the net you find them. I posted the building collapse scenario because that’s the most compelling evidence. It’s what made many people, that very day, question the “official” story.

I accepted the official story for a long time. Until I started looking at actual evidence and asking questions myself. I now believe, along with millions of other people around the world, that the “official” story is not the truth, and that there has been a diliberate cover-up.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 06:19 PM | Link to this

Korry, I looked at the poll and that question was whether they believed the US government had prior knowledge of the attacks. Not did the orchestrate the attacks.

By Rusty

October 27, 2005 06:20 PM | Link to this

to those who support the war: |=uc|< `/0u

this war resulted in creating a theocracy not “more freedom”. also stop it with your phony reasons for going to iraq.

Going to Iraq after 911 was a NON SEQUITUR. Just admit it! Our current leaders make bad decisions.

Stop being blinded by your Patriotism; you can criticize your own government, you |=uCk+ards. america is far from being as good as it can be. raise your standards for this country.

To artist of all kinds who initiate public discourse such as this cartoonist: i say Keep it up!

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 06:21 PM | Link to this

Still haven’t answered all my questions Korry

By Randy

October 27, 2005 06:22 PM | Link to this

I like sandwiches with mustard and pickles.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 06:22 PM | Link to this

I’m not getting into the “better or worse” argument. It’s pointless. That’s a semantic value judgment that doesn’t mean anything to me.

I don’t care who in history has been “worse.” If my country is violating human rights, civil rights, humanitarian domestic and international law, lying, violating international treaties and UN accords, refusing to participate in a reasonable international criminal court, then I think there is something wrong with the way my country is behaving.

Deal with it. And no, I’m not going to Google and link supporting facts. Look them up yourself.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 06:27 PM | Link to this

I am not asking you to google. I am just asking you the background on this theologian you has surmised the buildings were blown up by an inside job even though he has no experience in explosives. So yes you do believe in moral equivalency. I watched the documentary about 9/11 on the Discovery Channel and their theory was that the heat from the burning fuel in the jets cause the internal beams to melt and collapse. That seems plausible to me.

By mdhatter

October 27, 2005 06:29 PM | Link to this

Y2K, W?

By Korry

October 27, 2005 06:29 PM | Link to this

I’m not going to be manipulated by you, Ricky. This is not debate club, and I don’t respect your “rules.” I’ll say what I think the way I choose to say it.

That poll was taken before much of the supporting additional evidence was released. The results may be different now.

And maybe see you see a significant moral and ethical difference between knowing something is going to happen and doing nothing to stop it (e.g. having NORAD stand down), and being complicit in the actual act.

I don’t.

By Korry

October 27, 2005 06:32 PM | Link to this

Well, it’s not plausible, Ricky. The illustrations they used in that explanation completely ignored the existence of the steel core of the building.

Add that to the fact that what they described has never happened before in history, to any similarly constructed building, including some that have burned for days, at much hotter temperatures, and I think you can chalk up that offical explanation to part of the propaganda.

By Ricky

October 27, 2005 06:33 PM | Link to this

I didn’t set any rules for you Korry. Look you can believe what you want to. That is fine, like I said earlier we can agree to disagree. I am however, 100% confindent that history will prove me right.

By sodapants

October 27, 2005 06:36 PM | Link to this

Mike L hasn’t earned the right to even type the names of the ‘real’ men in his crappy art. He’s a leftist goon, and a hack for the enemy for all practical purposes. He’d never support the United States or the military because he doesn’t believe in them, even though they’re ones trying to make sure he doesn’t get his head sawed off by muslim fanatics, which WOULD happen if they ever got ahold of him (but after he got done hugging them, of course).
In fact, he’d never publish anything that offends muslims to begin with because he’s a chicken-sh1t, Pvssy @sshole and saves his slanderous offensiveness for American (where he knows he can get away with it…..ironically enough, because of American patriots like the ones on his dispicable list). Sleep tight, Mike… I know you will because you can sleep without fear. Wonder why, b1tch.

By Rusty

October 27, 2005 06:48 PM | Link to this

jerkpants: YOU are a political goon.

Killing people in iraq makes us safer here? How?

Military action can be justified and supported by “liberals”. but THIS war? why would pick THIS case as support your point?

are you suggesting that Mike can sleep tight because of your racist holy war?

By Korry

October 27, 2005 06:50 PM | Link to this

There you go, Ricky. Just as history has “proven” that Lee Harvey Oswald, Sirhan Sirhan, James Earl Ray and Timothy McVeigh acted alone.

The history we learn has nothing to do with proof. It’s the official story. Not the truth.

Many officials stories have been “proven” wrong, yet they will be accepted as “history” by the majority, because the majority wants to believe their country is the “greatest in history.”

By flootsnoot

October 27, 2005 07:18 PM | Link to this

Where is the punchline in the cartoon? It’s not as funny as I thought it should be for a cartoon about 2000 dead murdering mercenaries. When it hits 3000, could you at least make it funny?!?!

By smcc2cbc

October 27, 2005 07:36 PM | Link to this

Of all those angry with the WHY? cartoon, how many have lost a family member in Iraq?

Unless you have, you can dislike the cartoon and expound your reasons for, but you cannot assert that the cartoon dishonors the slain. That call can be made only by those whose family will forever be altered by the loss of their soldier in Iraq — and some may feel that way, many will not, but they are the only ones entitled to go there.

This is a democracy, and one has not only a right, but a duty, to question and examine the politics that lead Americans into war. One may agree or disagree with why we are in Iraq, or whether or not there exists even a substantive rationale for our presence there, but the real lack of patriotism manifests in the self-righteous insistence that one has no right to question the decisions of our government and its elected leaders. Those who cling to that view, who insist that one can’t support the troops and still be against the war, those are the ones whose loyalty should be questioned, because THAT is the antithesis of democracy and free speech. THAT dishonors the fallen Americans who have given their lives to preserve those freedoms. So you find a political cartoon offensive. If you love our country, you’ll confine your comments to why the cartoon offends you, rather than attacking the person of a political cartoonist.

People are dying. Ten times as many as have died have sustained life-changing wounds. We know why we are in Afghanistan, but there is no evidence to explain why we are in Iraq. Evidence, not hearsay. Every reason, and there have been a series of them, has fallen apart. Even the President and Vice-President finally admitted (on video and in print) that the conclusions of the 9/11 commission were correct: that while there no doubt were terrorists in Iraq (and Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Iran, and on and on), there was no link between Saddam and 9/11. Others choose to believe differently. Fine. Could you muster just a scintilla of class (and a modicum of fact) in voicing your opinion? Most of us have neither the time nor the inclination to listen as you indulge yourself in a venomous, obscene rant.

By Scott Byrnes

October 27, 2005 07:49 PM | Link to this

Why?

Perhaps Mike L can draw a cartoon showing the date 9/11 with the names of the victims.

I don’t recall that cartoon ever running.

By Mark

October 27, 2005 07:57 PM | Link to this

My name is Mark, and I do not “support the troops”. I do not “support” anything categorically, and those who claim to “Support the Troops” certainly don’t do so out of a love of freedom.

I also reject the ubiquitous (if unspoken) belief that one category of human beings is more valuable than others. So, while it’s completely tragic that 2,000 american soldiers have been killed and tens of thousands maimed for a ridiculous and transparent lie, it’s even more tragic that some vastly higher number of Iraqis have died as a result of the same deception.

“Support the Troops” is a clumsy Trojan Horse for blind obedience to power and ideological fanaticism. Nationalism is Mythology. Patriotism is folly. Volunterring your time as a mouthpiece for power is quite possibly the most cowardly, chickenshit endeavor known to humankind.

By tmg

October 27, 2005 08:03 PM | Link to this

Anyone who thinks the war was justified on the grounds that “we needed to take the fight to THEM” is an idiot. Iraq was completely contained, was allowing weapons inspectors in to verify that there were no WMD (which there weren’t!) and was no threat to us whatsoever.

Ooohh, but why just let Saddam stay contained instead of “taking him out”? Because we had to kill tens of thousands of his innocent citizens in the process! That’s why! This war has killed FAR more INNOCENT PEOPLE than 9/11. We obviously aren’t there because of any concern for the Iraqi people.

If there is any question about why we are there, take a look at the document “Rebuilding America’s Defenses”, signed by Dick Cheney, Richard Perle and a number of other administration associates. It spelled out, years ago, very clearly, that the US should use the “unresolved” issues after Gulf War I to gain a strategic logistical foothold in the mid east.

So the answer to “WHY?” is: murderous power and control.

…and maybe a little personal revenge (“He tried to kill my daddy!”)

You wingnuts f*ing jingoistic IDIOTS!

By Gregg Allinson

October 27, 2005 08:18 PM | Link to this

“Why?? Because that’s where the bad guys are. Duh. Would you rather fight them over here? Keep your eye on the ball, Mike.”

The only “bad guys” present in Iraq prior to 2003 were a defanged dictator presiding over a secular dictatorship that had, almost literally, been bombed back to the stone age a decade before and his henchmen. The “bad guys” present now are Muslim fanatics hellbent on destroying western civilization. We will have to fight the maniacs being trained to destroy themselves and take a trainful or buildingful or- god help us, if they get a hold of a nuclear weapon- a coastful of innocent people with them in Iraq right now here someday. That’s inevitable. How much better would life be for all of us if they didn’t have Iraq as a place to train and “prove” themselves?

The bottom line is, you’ve got to pick your fights carefully, especially with stakes this high. I don’t know exact figures, but I’d suspect the number of Americans directly killed by Saddam Hussein and his agents from 1992 to 2002 was far, far, far, far less than 2000. The number of Americans- and Europeans, and Asians- killed by Muslim fanatics in this year alone is far, far, far, far more than 2000. The less places they have to hide, the safer we are, but Dubya gave them a brand-spanking new haven, at the expense of American lives.

By Charles Cheves

October 27, 2005 08:59 PM | Link to this

Good work, Mike! People who support Bush and his war are either ignorant, badly misinformed or stupid; or they are folks who have a personal ax to grind, like the super wealthy who love those idiotic tax cuts, or industrialists who don’t give a damn for the environment.

By frank

October 27, 2005 09:21 PM | Link to this

Reading the semi-literate ravings provoked by this cartoon makes me even sadder, and more fearful about the future of my country, than the cartoon did. The Age of Reason is clearly over.

By yoohoo

October 27, 2005 09:25 PM | Link to this

Wow. Alot of wingnut dumbshits read the AJC.

By Carole

October 27, 2005 10:24 PM | Link to this

Mike, you are one of the best. I either laugh or cry, but I seldom come away indifferent. Thank you.

Freedom is never free. But why should only a small group of Americans die for the liberty of us all? There are no guarantees, 9/11 happened in spite of the warnings and similiar events can and probably will happen no matter who we fight. How does the Patriot Act and it’s invasion of our liberties guarantee our lives any more than torture of people who actually were not our enemies guarantee our lives?

Just as the founders of our constitution knew it was not perfect, they also knew it would work. And the father of that constitution said, “Of all the enemies of public liberty, war is perhaps the most to be dreaded, because it comprises and develops the germ of every other. (James Madison)

Liberty is both a blessing and a responsibility. So I do ask, WHY should the burden be borne only by a brave few for the enjoyment of all?

Peace, Carole

By John

October 27, 2005 10:50 PM | Link to this

To keep the people in power powerful, and to reaffirm their sense that America is not one OF the world, but must BE the leader of the world. The men who wage and reinforce these wars and deaths are not men at all but pure greedy cowards. A real man would have sat down and offered a peaceful hand to Saddam Hussein, then listened to him, then invited him into his house for tea. George Bush is a silly red puppet of evil sinners. And their manipulation only makes the U-SA more and more the ME-SA.

By sodapants

October 27, 2005 11:13 PM | Link to this

BLAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I love it when liberals openly take sides with the enemies of America.

In case you haven’t noticed… there’s a reason you have lost every major election for over 10 years. Bob Dole doesn’t count because even conservatives knew he was a throw-away….

There’s a funny little pattern i’ve noticed. When everything is nice, quiet, peaceful and lazy for a good while, America will take a chance on a democrat or a pinko liberal. There doesn’t seem to be too much danger with trying since we’re in good shape and mayve something good will happen (besides blow-jobs).

But!

When sh1t hits the fan, and adults are required to solve problems… people just don’t elect liberals. Sorry, that’s just the way it is… and thank GOD that there are still enough Americans left who know better. Whe times turn serious and dangerous people just don’t trust liberals to run their gov’t. There is no mystery why if one cares to look, but I just think it’s typical. Kinda like teaching kids how to drive… Sure, an empty parking lot is ok to practice in, but the open road is no place for a child. :)

By moby

October 27, 2005 11:19 PM | Link to this

sodapants, you’re a moron. Your sweeping generalizations are idiotic. You’re an ignorant, ditto-head partisan hack.

Have a nice day.

By moby

October 27, 2005 11:23 PM | Link to this

It’s the current people in charge who “govern” like petulant adolescents. They’ve made a horrendous mess, and have gotten where they are by fraud, conspiracy, lies, propaganda and incompetence. Your condescending drivel, sodapants, doesn’t change reality. And it doesn’t make you right, or smart.

By sodapants

October 27, 2005 11:24 PM | Link to this

Hey, Carole!

The answer to your stupid question is that, since you don’t watch the news or follow it AT ALL clearly, all of the countries that liberals demand we get support from in this war are the BIGGEST recipients of Saddam’s payoffs and kickbacks!

I realize that you’re not all that bright, but even you can put together why Russia and France opposed the war and did not help… and in fact, actively worked against us.

Get a brain, Carol. You talk blanky about the constitution and turn the bodies of the men who wrote it over in their graves.

By sodapants

October 27, 2005 11:30 PM | Link to this

Poor Moby…. he’s seen the V**** Monologues too many times apparently, and is proud to be a p***.

Moby, your the kind of candy-a* that makes people want to attack us.

Your hero and prospective ‘job’, Bill Clinton ignored attacks on our country for the entirety of his terms. Bin Laden himself stated that he knew he could attack us here because we ran from Somalia.

Even after this enlightening session you still have no clue.

Congratulations, Nurse Moby… you now know why people don’t trust liberals with the defense of the country. :)

By moby

October 27, 2005 11:33 PM | Link to this

Just keep talking, sodapants, and proving what an igorant jackass you are.

By sodapants

October 27, 2005 11:38 PM | Link to this

I’ll do that, sister Moby…. and you keep hiding under your blankie at night praiying that no one comes and hurts you. LOL

And I’ll just assume that your limp response means that you can’t argue with me so you’re just going to leave quietly. Good for you… for once in your life you’ve made the right decision. Geek.

By Carole

October 27, 2005 11:52 PM | Link to this

Sodapants, there is a reservation with your name on it atFree Republic. You and the freepers are on the same level. On second thought, you are of a slightly higher quality, which they will appreciate.
Trust me. They’re evangelical.

Peace, Carole

By sodapants

October 27, 2005 11:53 PM | Link to this

Just for the record, Ms. Moby… If Mike Luckovich has freedom of speech,…then so do I.

I’m not goint to sit on my hands and let fruitcake liberals like you and Mike slander the men and women who volunteer to defend ‘my’ country (I say ‘my’ country because you don’t deserve the privelige of being an American who lives quietly and peacefully under the security those people provide)

I have friends in active combat zones. I have friends who have family members in active combat zones. You and this d1ckless geek Luckovich are not going to use their names as a propoganda tool for surrender as long as “I” live, you candy-striping little moocher.

Have you ever met anyone in the military you didn’t spit on, Moby-baby?

Do youself a favor, Nancy.. wipe the boogers off your face and decide just what kind od society you want to be involved in and support. If it’s not one where turds like Luckovich enjoy freedom because of military deterant, you need to be elsewhere….. Perhaps you should be in France. Or to put it another way, perhaps you’re a woman trapped in mans body.

By sodapants

October 27, 2005 11:56 PM | Link to this

That’s pretty lame, Carole… but I never expect much of an argument from communists…

Nice try, but you’ve bombed again.

Next time, try addressing the points.

By jerry fardella

October 28, 2005 12:00 AM | Link to this

Wow: another tribute to the waisted American lives. Sir, you have no brains. I was there In new York city when those allies of saddam attacked us. I also know, maybe you have forgotton that they tried to blow up the sunway system at atlantic avenue in brooklyn, befor the war. This butcher, saddam, gave his sons permission to set up rape rooms for wmen and children, whatever those freakoes desired. Just today, the wonderful UN said Saddam bribed over 2,000 companies doing business in iraq. Even if we were incorrect about the weapons, british intelligence and a host of others throughout the world still say that he was trying to buy enough u-234 (A BOMB STUFF) to take out NYC. I thank God every night for our servide people and hope that citizens like yourself wil only se the light. Perhaps, if the next attack were in your town, you might think a little different.

By moby

October 28, 2005 12:01 AM | Link to this

igorant = ignorant

I know how the anal retentive types with the inferiority complex, who need to talk down to anyone they don’t agree with, like to make an issue out of internet typos.

By moby

October 28, 2005 12:05 AM | Link to this

I haven’t said anything to slander anyone. And I haven’t said you don’t have a right to free speech. I’m just expressing my opinon of your opinion.

I have ancestors who came to this land on the Mayflower. Your perception that people who don’t agree with you aren’t Americans is ignorant, inflammatory and childish, to say the least.

By GreggAllinson

October 28, 2005 12:07 AM | Link to this

“I love it when liberals openly take sides with the enemies of America.”

You mean like when George W. Bush set up an Islamic theocracy after Muslims attacked New York and Washington and killed thousands of people?

Oh, I’m sorry, I’ve made a mistake- George W. Bush is a conservative who not only “takes sides with the enemies of America”, but sends American soldiers to die in an effort to empower them.

By moby

October 28, 2005 12:10 AM | Link to this

And you haven’t said anything relevant or intelligent enough to “argue” with. Your arguments are condescending, stereotypical and pretty much meaningless, sodapants. A string of baseless insults doesn’t mean much.

And jerry fardella, it’s sad to see another wasted American education.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 12:12 AM | Link to this

“I was there In new York city when those allies of saddam attacked us.”

Funny- I wasn’t aware that Saddam ruled or had a formal alliance with Saudi Arabia- y’know, the place where Osama bin Laden and virtually all of the 9/11 hijackers hailed from? Y’know- our “allies”?

Repeat after me: outside the geographical boundries of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was a powerless idiot with a big mouth. He was about as dangeous as that Elmo impersonator who just got arrested. Radical Islam is the true enemy, and by setting up a theocracy in Iraq, Bush has emboldened and empowered it. “Why?” is a terribly pertinent question to ask.

By John

October 28, 2005 12:13 AM | Link to this

Since when does fighting them over there guarantee that we won’t be fighting them over here? It seems that between the “collateral damage” to the civilans of Iraq, and our policy of skirting laws on torture, we are sowing a generation of future anti-American zealots in the Middle East.

By bryan

October 28, 2005 12:18 AM | Link to this

i havnt see one credible pro war argument here and I’ve looked at all the posts. Russ”thats where the bad guys are/eye on the ball” Thankyou Bill O’reilly echo chamber. Its just too dumb to tear apart. To get rid od a despot? Sorry, for all his flaws, Saddam knew how to keep his country together between warring factions. Its the mid east way and it worked. Far more iraqis have been murdered by George than Saddam now. To prevent another 9 11? 911 was committed by an islamic faction openly OPPOSED to saddam. The lack of American logic is stupendous To protect US freedom? So the oval office would be occupied by Saddam now if US hadnt attacked? The US would be under facist rule? WTF??Once again…you pro warrers are using throw away right wing emotive slogans that MEAN NOTHING? Where’s the logic???? Qualify your statements without disparaging those who oppose this monstrous concept…let me see you do that. Everyone lied about WMDS…thats another Fox lie. Bush n Blair sold the war on an IMMINENT danger. France and co said BS!! and inspections were effective. FrANCE AND CO were RIGHT. Americans generally have poor focus and education as a direct result of your culture…all I can say is you got the president you deserve. I am an Australian and I’m not too proud of that either.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 12:19 AM | Link to this

Cry me a river, Nurse Moby….

I have roots to the Mayflower as well. So what. That doens’t make YOU a pioneer of sh1t! You’re probably a stain on your family reputation.

Matters not! I’m here to debunk all the nonsense that panty-waste liberals like you spew on our military, their efforts, their cause, their accomplishments, their sacrifices, their mission and their standing in this society.

Useless turds like you, Luckovich, Clooney, Brad Pitt, Baldwin, Sheen, Al fvckin’ Franken etc…. are not the reason Americans enjoy the prosperity and security that they do. Those are the idiots who are the bi-product of the work done by other people with guts, guns and blood.

You’re a dumb girl, Moby, so i’ll break this down for you. I know politics. I work in it. And I can’t seem to find any reason for this trash that Luckovich drew, and that you support, besides one that reduces the confidence of our country and the people who fight for it. That used to be called treason, Moby. Thank your lucky stars it’s slacked off a bit. I don’t base that entirely on this piece of cr@p fro Luckovich that we’re talking about…. he’s done MANY more things that make me more than happy to come here and beat up on his idiotic supporters.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 12:31 AM | Link to this

You’re pretty dumb too, Gregg. I don’t suppose you’ve ever heard of Abu Nidal or Salman Pak, eh? LOL

Go back under your bridge and make paper airplanes.

By moby

October 28, 2005 12:40 AM | Link to this

The politics that you right wing hacks play isn’t the politics of democracy. It’s the politics of fascism. “Working in it” doesn’t make you smarter than anyone else. It’s obvious you need someone to believe you’re smarter than someone, you’re you wouldn’t need to be such a condescending, insulting jerk.

Nothing you’ve said is worth a damn. And I’m sure it’s quite obvious to anyone with a brain. Over 80% of the people who have seen this page like the work. Yet the right wing hacks have to be vocal, have to insult, have to put down, have to make themselves feel someone is beneath them.

What a loser.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 12:42 AM | Link to this

SodaPants, I have four simple questions:

1) Do you, or any credible source that you can cite (and honestly, I don’t care if it’s Rush Limbaugh or Al Franken, just so long as it’s not the Weekly World News), have convincing proof that Saddam Hussein was in posession of weapons of mass destruction in late 2002? 2) If he did, was he planning on using them directly against the United States of America or American interests abroad prior to March, 2003? 3) Has anybody ever established a credible link between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden or anyone in any position of authority in Al Queda? That is to say, did Saddam Hussein have a position of authority in Al Queda or exert any direct influence over Al Queda’s activities? 4) Is the world safer now that Islam is “a main source of legislation” in Iraq under the new constitution. Remember, Muslims planned and executed the 9/11 attacks, the 7/7 London train bombings, the 3/11 Madrid train bombings, and numerous other barbaric attacks against innocent civilians, while- to the best of my knowledge- the number confirmed attacks on American or European civilians by Saddam Hussein and members of his government totalled just about zero.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 12:43 AM | Link to this

This is a waste of time considering that the AJC is a rag for liberals and Anerica’s enemies. There isn’t any wonder why it’s called the “Al Jazzera Constitution.”

To pinheads like Nurse Moby and Special Agent Gregg (LOL), the holocost never happened either andthe PLO is an honest broker for peace in the middle east. Hammas endorsed Gregg for chief spokesman 12 minutes ago. Congrats.

You geeks are the reason folks like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and so on are allowed to fester and grow like a cancer in this world until it is too late to prevent the catostrophic damage and death that inevitabely follows such hero’s of the left.

Shame on you….. And again, is there any mystery why Americans don’t trust liberals to defend them??

By moby

October 28, 2005 12:48 AM | Link to this

What blind fools like sodapants refuse to see is that the current administration is closer to fascism than this country has ever been. It’s you who would blindly support a fascist regime, without question, sodapants. You’re doing it now.

That’s not patriotism. That’s ignorance. I hope the brown shirt fits well.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 12:49 AM | Link to this

“I don’t suppose you’ve ever heard of Abu Nidal or Salman Pak, eh? LOL”

I’ll admit, I hadn’t ‘til just now. But unless I’m missing something, I fail to see how either Mr. Nidal or the facility in question prove that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, or that he was rubbing his hands together in eager anticipation of dropping a nuke on New York or releasing thousands of canisters of lethal bacteria throughout Los Angeles. Plus, from what I can see, Nidal and Hussein were enemies, not allies.

By moby

October 28, 2005 12:54 AM | Link to this

He can’t answer direct questions that require critical thought, Gregg. That’s obvious. All he can do is sling mindless insults and try to make people feel inferior. He behaves like a fascist, then points fingers at someone else.

Typical ignorant right wing rhetoric and drivel. He’s not capable of intelligent argument.

He’ll be the first to deny the holocaust this country perpetrates, just as he would have if he were a Nazi. And he clearly would have been a Nazi, given the chance.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 12:57 AM | Link to this

Easy one… thanks for the step ladder, Gregg.

1) Yes. Saddam used such weapons in the past. For the record, the weapons in question included Sarin Gas, Mustard Gas and Cyclo-Sarin Gas. (i’m sure you the difference between them so I won’t bother to explain….ahem) These are undisputed facts, recorded and reported by the US, Britain, Germany, France, Belgium, etc etc etc…as well as the the entire UN. As much as I know you want an eternal mommy, I am not it. You can look it up yourself. Trust me though… that is true. The United States military uncovered, aside from half of the Iraqi air force burried in the sand, more than a dozen artillary shells that tested positive for Sarin, Cyclo-Sarin and Mustard Gas. They also discovered random parts and pieces of nuclear reactors, strangely burried in the front yards of scientists known to work on the non-existant program. LOL! What.. us? hahah

Besides being active in the chemical arms tradew business, Iraq was active in terrorist training camps that specialized in hijacking airlines with box-cutters (like the 9-11 bunch did) That fact has been seen on the ground and testified to by former Iraqi regime guards, agents and gov’t officials.

Aside from the above, Iraq actively aided and abetted known terrorists on the US ‘wanted list’ such as Abu Nidal, who had an apartment paid for by the Iraqi gov’t in Baghdad.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 01:03 AM | Link to this

Good Lord, Gregg!!

Abu Nidal is the opening salvo to see if you know what the fvck you’re talking about! You’ve never heard of the guy! LOL!!!

You have no credibility here.. he’s been talked about publically for at least a decade. Get out of here, ya useless, appeasing lib…..

Your goal here is not a factualy account of reasons for war… just more useless, uninformed drivel.

Salman Pak has been in the news THIS YEAR!! LOL

Beat it, tree-hugger….

By Mike A

October 28, 2005 01:07 AM | Link to this

‘Freedom isn’t free, it costs folks like you and me’……and its $3.15-Premium !! Keep Re-gurgitating the mindless ‘talking head’ jabber!! It just goes to show how numb the American public has become.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 01:07 AM | Link to this

So, in other words, not a single answer to any of my questions, soda?

“Hammas endorsed Gregg for chief spokesman 12 minutes ago. Congrats.”

Yes, I’m certain that calling radical Islam the true enemy has won me many friends in a fanatical Muslim terrorist organization hellbent on destroying one of our allies and then taking us out next.

“You geeks are the reason folks like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and so on are allowed to fester and grow like a cancer in this world until it is too late to prevent the catostrophic damage and death that inevitabely follows such hero’s of the left.”

Fighting an enemy who has attacked or is about to attack is perfectly reasonable. I supported (and still do support) the war in Afghanistan: bin Laden attacked us, the Taleban supported and housed bin Laden, so in order to defend ourselves from further attacks, the proper course of action was to attempt to capture or kill Osama bin Laden and dismantle any organizations that support him, such as the Taleban. While the Taleban’s stranglehold on Afghanistan was broken, it still very much exists and could endanger America once more. So it only makes sense to stay over there until we’re sure that Afghanistan is a stable country under the rule of a government friendly to America and her allies.

Iraq? The analogy I’ve used is this: did FDR attack Leningrad a year or two after Pearl Harbor? No. Stalin was a mass-murdering lunatic actively opposed to America. But guess what? He didn’t attack us. He was not the larger threat at the time. We had a choice: fight a war against the guy who might hurt us someday, or fight a war against a bunch of guys who’d just attacked us. As I said, Bush made the right choice in attacking Afghanistan. But Iraq?

As I learned in 7th grade, fighting a battle on two fronts is often a losing proposition. A war in Afghanistan and concentrated effort to destroy Osama bin Laden made sense. Giving up on capturing Osama and attacking a man who- while certainly an enemy of mankind and a mass murderer- was not the imminent threat that militant Islam is was baffling at best.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 01:10 AM | Link to this

“Abu Nidal is the opening salvo to see if you know what the fvck you’re talking about! You’ve never heard of the guy! LOL!!!”

I’ve admitted my ignorance. Please educate me. How does he tie together Saddam and 9/11? How does he prove that Saddam was about to launch a major attack on America? How does he prove that Saddam was in a position of authority?

I’m not looking for insults, I’m looking for answers. If you can supply me with them, please do so.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 01:12 AM | Link to this

Here’s number 4, Greggie….

Saddam did indeed finance and support terrorists. Abu Nidal is the most famous example because once it was disclosed that he was living in Baghdad, he immediately committed suicide by shooting himself 4 times in the back. LOL This was immediately ‘after’ 9/11 mind you…

hmmmm,.. I wonder if a certain dictator was trying to eliminate ties to terrorism as quickly as possible?

nah.. teehee

Another great example was a 12’ painting removed from one of Saddam’s palaces after Baghdad fell. It showed the great leader smoking a cigar in from of a scene of the Twin Towers burning.

oops…

Ut oh.. Ramzi Yusef was a former Iraqi intelligence officer. yikes..

C’mon, Gregg.. you HAVE to know who Ramzi Yusef is.. right?

you do, right?

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 01:15 AM | Link to this

If you’re admitting your ignorance, Gregg… why the fvck are you writing posts that tell ME I don’t know sh1t?

That’s pretty bold. bub…

Your 4 questions routine is political softball for anyone who at least watches television.

I’ve done number 1 and number 4. Should I bother with 2 and 3?

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 01:23 AM | Link to this

“So, in other words, not a single answer to any of my questions, soda?”

^I apologise for this statement. When I typed it, I hadn’t seen the following:

“Yes. Saddam used such weapons in the past. For the record, the weapons in question included Sarin Gas, Mustard Gas and Cyclo-Sarin Gas. (i’m sure you the difference between them so I won’t bother to explain….ahem) These are undisputed facts, recorded and reported by the US, Britain, Germany, France, Belgium, etc etc etc…as well as the the entire UN”

I know and I don’t dispute what you’re saying. What I do dispute is that Hussein had the means and desire to attack America or Americans in late 2002/ early 2003.

“They also discovered random parts and pieces of nuclear reactors, strangely burried in the front yards of scientists known to work on the non-existant program. LOL! What.. us? hahah”

Buried. Implying that inspections were working.

Again, Saddam was bad news, but I honestly don’t think he was much of a threat after the Gulf War, sanctions, and UN inspectors. If he was or had the potential to be, he was not the direct threat to us in late 2002, when war talk really began heating up.

“Besides being active in the chemical arms tradew business, Iraq was active in terrorist training camps that specialized in hijacking airlines with box-cutters (like the 9-11 bunch did) That fact has been seen on the ground and testified to by former Iraqi regime guards, agents and gov’t officials.”

Were the 9/11 hijackers specifically trained at these camps in Iraq, and was the Iraqi government directly financing and training the terrorists? If so, then I’ll shut up.

By moby

October 28, 2005 01:27 AM | Link to this

Obviously the right wing propaganda machine that’s intended to instill fear and justify illegal war works very well on sodapants.

The United States has used weapons of mass destruction, as well. Does that give any country the right to engage in a preemptive attack against us?

The Nazi regime used propaganda and “created” enemies to instill fear in the people and justify preemptive war as well. And this administration is behaving just like them.

Goebbels would be happy to know you, sodapants, and know how well their age-old tactics works on people like you.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 01:29 AM | Link to this

“why the fvck are you writing posts that tell ME I don’t know sh1t?”

Where have I said that? I’ve admitted my ignorance and you’ve given me answers. Believe it or not, I do appreciate that.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 01:35 AM | Link to this

“Buried. Implying that inspections were working.”

No Gregg,, this ONLY implies lying and waiting until the UN burns out and gives up. That’s how the game works. That’s what North Korea did, whaich Iraq is following. And oooh lookie.. now they’re a Nuke power that openly threaten my country.

What the hell are you defending here, Gregg? Is it another countries “right” to develope weapons that can kill millions while proclaiming that they’ll do it? I can’t figure you people out.

The answer to your question, however, is YES! There have been several testimonials from Iraqi’s who were military, guard, gov’t and so on that say Salman Pak was used to trail terrorists in the art of hijacking planes with small knives and box-cutters. This facility was, oddly enough, just down the road from where Abu Nidal used to live! LOL

I’m sure that’s all just a coinsidence though, considering that we’ve only ever seen one terror attack that used the methods specifically taught there.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 01:37 AM | Link to this

“Saddam did indeed finance and support terrorists” is your answer to “Is the world safer now that Islam is “a main source of legislation” in Iraq under the new constitution”?

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 01:41 AM | Link to this

“What the hell are you defending here, Gregg? Is it another countries “rightâ€? to develope weapons that can kill millions while proclaiming that they’ll do it?”

Not at all. I’m just questioning the wisdom of attacking a government that hadn’t killed massive numbers of American civilians and did not appear to have the means to do so when an enemy that does have the means to kill massive numbers of American civilians and has done so and continues to do so is out there.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 01:47 AM | Link to this

Why would you care if America is safer if Islam is the main source, Gregg?

You opposed the war to begin with even though Iran and the Mullah’s are next door and Syria is run by a lunatic as well. Afghanistan and the Taliban? Pakistan and Musharif?

Are you kidding?

The one thing I CAN say is YES!! We ARE safer because Afghanistan and Iraq no longer have the freedom to operate as terror surrogates. 2 down, bub.

Also, the war in Iraq draws the islamo-facists THERE…..not here. They absolutely HAVE to keep Iraq as a base. That’s why they’re wfighting so hard for it.

If they hated Saddam and Iraq so much for being secular.. why on Earth are the dying in such great numbers to try and get it back?

The reality on the ground, Gregg, is that Iraq housed a lot of weapons, training sites, and money that helped the Jihad All-Stars kill Americans and Isralei’s.

Losing that base really p** ‘em off… and i’m glad we can show uop and kill them for it.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 01:51 AM | Link to this

“Not at all. I’m just questioning the wisdom of attacking a government that hadn’t killed massive numbers of American civilians and did not appear to have the means to do so when an enemy that does have the means to kill massive numbers of American civilians and has done so and continues to do so is out there.”

you’ve lost me here, Gregg. What country has done what you’ve claimed they’ve done above?

That isn’t the point though, Gregg, because you’re babbling about something that MUST have happened 40 years ago. Otherwise your non-recognigition of the Taliban and the @ss-kicking they got is just an insult.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 02:11 AM | Link to this

I’m weary of playing the role of ‘educator’ here, Gregg, and i’m going to go. Just like voting, you shouldn’t show up to the booth if you don’t know sh1t about the candidates.

You clearly don’t know the reasons why you support America’s enemies, except that you were raised that way, or you just dislike or resent American success.

Me? I don’t care one way or the other. My country is strong and that’s why it is hated. That’s also why we are blamed for everything from global warming to genocide conducted by other people (Sudan).

Where’s the UN? I thought they had a budget for this? (Peace-Keepers?? LOL ) Oh, wait.. they need to recruit new officers that aren’t serial rapists. Sorry, my bad. Our fault again.

I’m tired of providing a defense umbrella for people who use us and then criticize us. That umbrella includes most of Europe and South America. Hell, it also includes anyone who asks for or needs help.

Most of the time we Americans just send help anyway, regardless of politics.

When was the last time the world community came to our aid, Gregg?

Don’t waste your breath because I already know the answer.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 02:17 AM | Link to this

“What country has done what you’ve claimed they’ve done above?”

I didn’t say a country. I said an enemy- Al Queda.

“The one thing I CAN say is YES!! We ARE safer because Afghanistan and Iraq no longer have the freedom to operate as terror surrogates.”

Really? Terrorists are no longer free to operate in Iraq? Then who’s killing Americans over there? And if they’re no longer training there, then we can leave, because surely the country is now a bastion of peace and democracy.

“why on Earth are the dying in such great numbers to try and get it back?”

They’re not trying to “get it back”. They’re trying to claim it. Important distinction.

“Gregg, because you’re babbling about something that MUST have happened 40 years ago. Otherwise your non-recognigition of the Taliban and the @ss-kicking they got is just an insult.”

“Non-recognition of the Taliban”? You mean the organization that I said should be destroyed? The one that I think we were right to go to war against?

If your reference to “something that MUST have happened 40 years ago” refers to my World War II analogy, I still believe it’s a valid one. Just as Stalin was an enemy of America, so too was Hussein. But Stalin was not the greatest threat to America at the time. Going after him and ignoring Hitler would have been suicidal, just as going after Hussein and ignoring bin Laden is proving to be suicidal.

Finally, from an earlier post:

“No Gregg,, this ONLY implies lying and waiting until the UN burns out and gives up. That’s how the game works. That’s what North Korea did, whaich Iraq is following. And oooh lookie.. now they’re a Nuke power that openly threaten my country.”

OK, worst case scenario: inspectors leave Iraq in 2003. We don’t invade. Iraq becomes a nuclear power after a few years. Now, at this point, Saddam has a choice: nuke New York and inflict what would undoubtedly be a major blow against the US at the expense of not only his life, but the very existence of his entire country (while America would survive and rebuild), or sit on his bomb. You never know with somebody like Saddam, but- much as Stalin before him did- I think he’d rather sit on his bomb.

The bottom line is, if America’s going to have enemies with nuclear bombs, I’d rather they be guys wearing uniforms and all gathered in a central location than guys wearing trenchcoats and spread out all over the place.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 02:23 AM | Link to this

Holy sh1t…. read THIS one…

“OK, worst case scenario: inspectors leave Iraq in 2003. We don’t invade. Iraq becomes a nuclear power after a few years. Now, at this point, Saddam has a choice: nuke New York and inflict what would undoubtedly be a major blow against the US at the expense of not only his life, but the very existence of his entire country (while America would survive and rebuild), “

This is why AMericans don’t trust liberals to defend them. The lives of millions of Americans don’t matter if as long we don’t be big bullies.

You’re a lunatiuc, Gregg. Thanks for posting that in public. LOL

See.. to your average liberal… you should never engage in self defense. That just promotes violence! LOL

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 02:28 AM | Link to this

Gregg… there is a reason you are a pinhead and not in charge of anything….

see the following….

“The bottom line is, if America’s going to have enemies with nuclear bombs, I’d rather they be guys wearing uniforms and all gathered in a central location than guys wearing trenchcoats and spread out all over the place.”

LOL! Who’s wearing the coats? Is it Cheney? hahaha Gregg… you need to be slapped, seriously. The major point here is that you DO NOT gove a nuke to someone who agrees with a certain population that endorses SUICIDE BOMBING!!!

GET IT!!??? IDIOT!!!!

I’m tellin’ ya.. Once again i’m praying for the Israeli’s to get it done. God knows the American system would never violate it’s diversity policy and attack an enemy. That’s just hateful….

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 02:29 AM | Link to this

I’m cutting out too, Soda. It’s been fun. One last rebuttal: You said “You clearly don’t know the reasons why you support America’s enemies, except that you were raised that way, or you just dislike or resent American success”.

Now, I have said that Al Queda, the Taleban and Hamas are dangers to America, I support military action against them, and I think the world would be much safer without all of them. I have said that Saddam was a murderer, a maniac, and a threat to America (albiet not the greatest threat to America). I don’t think that’s supporting any of the above.

Furthermore, I defy you to tell me how the war in Iraq has been an American success. Has it deprived terrorists of a base? No. Has it halted the spread of radical Islam? No, and it may well have encouraged it. Has it led to the capture of Osama bin Laden or the dismantling of Al Queda? Nope- it’s helped al-Zarqawi become one of the most powerful figures in the organization.

Afghanistan was, at the very least, a partial success. But Iraq? Trust me, if Bush had been successful in capturing bin Laden and/or destroying Al Queda, I’d name my firstborn after him. But he hasn’t. Iraq is no better now than it was under Hussein. It’s worse.

By Gregg Allinson

October 28, 2005 02:37 AM | Link to this

“Who’s wearing the coats?”

Terrorists. You know- the guys who wear bombs under coats. Or shirts. Or whatever. The point is, you know the guy in the Iraq military uniform is bad news. The guy in the T-shirt and jeans? You just don’t know.

Do you have to work at being intentionally ignorant, or does this just come naturally to you?

“This is why AMericans don’t trust liberals to defend them. The lives of millions of Americans don’t matter if as long we don’t be big bullies.”

You know know of mutually assured destruction, right? The idea during the Cold War was that Russia would never nuke us because if they did, we’d nuke them right back. So Russia never launched nukes at us because if they did, they knew they were writing their own death warrant. Same deal with Iraq: it’s very, very, very, very unlikely that Saddam would’ve launched a nuclear attack against America, and even if he did, he’d pay for it. Dearly.

Contrast that to twelve guys with dirty bombs in suitcases up and down the East Coast. How do we deter that? How do we ensure the people who planned the attacks are destroyed?

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 02:40 AM | Link to this

LOL!

“Now, I have said that Al Queda, the Taleban and Hamas are dangers to America, I support military action against them”

Gee whiz, Gregg… where do you suppose you’re going to find them? In Al-Qiedaistan? In Hammasistan? In Talibanistan?
The probem with you libs is that you have a natural tendency to force people into groups. ie: Blacks. Jews. Hispanics, etc… YOu do so in order do distribute things based on their historical suffering, current need, and future!

That doesn’t work out so well though in war because gasp people die there. Yes, liberals are deprived of another source of revenue and therefore hate conflict. shame as it is…

Secondly, Gregg… if you don’t know why a 4 year war with 2,000 dead is a success, you’re a bigger moron than I thought, and I look forward to seeing you again.

Sleep tight, because you can.

(ppsssssst. American soldiers make sure you can)

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 02:48 AM | Link to this

Gregg,.. you are so naieve it’s actually starting to make me worry about what you eat.

PLease.. the Soviets did not constantly commit suicide in order to kill us, or children, or anyone that just happened to be around at the time for intimmidation reasons.
Geezus.. do you know ANYTHING about history??

The SOviets wanted to live ….and CARED about living! If they didn’t they would have nuked us a long time ago to get it over with! Jihadists want death! They sign up for it!

YOu pinheads better wake uip and realize hat your natural enemy is not the republican party, but the fokks who saw people’s heads off and put it on the internet for kicks.

Again.. this is why Americans don’t trust liberals to defend them. The enemy ALWAYS gets the benefit of the doubt from the left!

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 03:08 AM | Link to this

Gregg,… what you’ve described has already happened, ya putz. Th taliban and Saddam have paid dearly for thier roles and support and assistance in terrorism. WE got of light and should be happy that it didn’t take a nuclear explosion and millions of deaths to make it happen.

What the hell are you talking about?? Who, in your tiny little mind should “pay dearly”? Where are they? Who lets them them live there? Who pays for them? Who forges their Visas? Who holds organizes and funds parades their streets when thousansds of infidels are murdered? Who cuts people’s heads off while they’re tied up? Who defends them? Who reports favorably for them? Who refuses to take action against them? Who takes their side? Who resists winning against them? Who tries to makes deals with them until the NEXT time?

Gregg… I hope you not an American… because you are personally resposible for the danger I face.

By Bubba

October 28, 2005 03:26 AM | Link to this

Hmmmm…I think sodapants doesn’t have enough confidence in his own perception of reality to express it without childish insults and name calling.

Which is understandable because his perception of reality is extremely sociocentric and ill-conceived. I’ve often seen the loony right wingnuts do this kind of thing on more progressive sites and blogs.

They funniest part is that they think they’re the majority. Acutally, only about 30% of Americans identify as conservatives, and about 60% profess a more liberal ideology.

The reasons the neocons have such a strangle hold on the government currently is because they’ve cheated, lied, smeared, “swift boated”, defrauded, fear mongered and gerrymandered to win elections. They have no ethics or integrity. They think anything is justifiable to win and be in control.

We sleep much less safely because of these self-serving corporate robber barons and war profiteers. But they’ll get theirs. The legal reconning has only just begun.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 03:49 AM | Link to this

LOL…

What innitially appeared to be a wise, calm “thinker”… turned out to be just another leftist moron who can’t speak to any point, answer any question or say anthing above the 3rd grade reading level.

you dork… :)

I do agree with you on one part though. Conservatives think they’re the majority. AlGore and Kerry might agree also.. LOL!!!

you pinhead,,,,

By Bubba

October 28, 2005 04:05 AM | Link to this

Apparently the child didn’t read this part:

The reasons the neocons have such a strangle hold on the government currently is because they’ve cheated, lied, smeared, “swift boated�, defrauded, fear mongered and gerrymandered to win elections.

You’re a pathetic troll. Get over it.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 04:15 AM | Link to this

Ya, and you are still the only president to be impeached, Bubba. :)

LOL

you slime-ball.. who the hell are YOU lecturing about lying ,cheatubg and “smearing” (LOL! Did you smear it on Monica’s face, Mr. President?)?

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 04:18 AM | Link to this

I’m sorry, I forgot to ask you, Bubba.. How’d that whole thing work out? LOL!

WHat are you going to be remembered for again? A d1ck-sucking? blaahaha

oooh, that’s classic. Let’s talk more about Bubba. Anyone?

By Bubba

October 28, 2005 04:42 AM | Link to this

Wow, you are truly stupid. Andrew Johnson was the first president to be impeached by the House of Representatives. Articles of Impeachment were introduced for Richard Nixon, but he resigned before the House took a vote.

The House voted to impeach Clinton, by a vote of 228-206. Then he was tried by the Senate, and aquitted by a vote of 55-45. Do you know what aquitted means?

The pathetic Republicans in government at the time spent four years and $60 million for what was essentially a partisan witch hunt, that resulted in aquittal. A truly stupid episode in American history, that could have been handled much more intelligently, by the unethical, criminally inclined Republicans who were in office at the time.

No US president has ever been involuntarily removed from office, because none have been impeached and convicted. No conviction, no crime.

It hardly holds a candle to the treason, conspiracy and everything else the current administration and Republicans in Congress need to be held accountable for.

Not even close. It really illustrates how sad and desperate the right wingers have become that they have to keep bringing up past administrations and their mistakes. The current administration is probably one of the worst and most corrupt in history.

But then considering Watergate and Iran Contra, that certainly seems to be a Republican “trend”, doesn’t it.

It’s kind of difficult to not resort to childish name calling when referring to someone as ignorant, ill-informed and loony as you are.

By Dave

October 28, 2005 05:37 AM | Link to this

Jay said:

“Just thought I would throw a question out there…

True, WMD have not been found except for the couple of liters Sarin. Does it necessarily mean that since they have not been found, that they never existed?”

Great point! I’ve been saying the same thing about unicorns and leprechauns to my skeptical friends for years, but they still don’t believe!!!

By Joel

October 28, 2005 06:52 AM | Link to this

lolo u all suk k? we r kill every1 who r not christian americans cuz that protects our freedom. God kant u get it? Bush = our salvation! stoopid liberals! u only repeat left-wing talkin points cuz u kant think 4 urself. god wanted bush to be prez cuz he has teh ballz to send other people to fight. thats sum ballz, unliek u democratix. god will strike u down 4 supporting terrorists, k? its in teh bible sumwhere i bet.

REPUBILCANS RULE! YAYAYA!

By geechee

October 28, 2005 08:39 AM | Link to this

Mike, I’m not sure how long this took you but, that’s a pretty incredible piece of work.

By Mike

October 28, 2005 08:49 AM | Link to this

Why couldn’t Mike make a cartoon asking Why using the victims of 9-11?

Also on another topic, I am disappointed that he has not done any type of tribute to Rosa Parks. She was truly one of the bravest souls of our time.

By khjfk

October 28, 2005 09:49 AM | Link to this

Re: Abu Nidal, from Wikipedia

Abu Nidal is known to have entered Iraq in 1999 after being expelled from Libya by Muammar Gadaffi, who was distancing himself from terrorism in an effort to re-establish diplomatic relations with the U.S. and UK after the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, which Gadaffi is believed to have commissioned. The Iraqi government later said Abu Nidal had entered the country using a fake Yemeni passport and was not there with their knowledge, but by 2001, at the latest, he was living there openly, in defiance of the Jordanian government, whose state-security court sentenced him in absentia in 2001 to death by hanging for his role in the 1994 assassination of a Jordanian diplomat in Beirut.

On August 19, 2002, al-Ayyam, the official newspaper of the Palestinian Authority, reported that Abu Nidal had died three days earlier of multiple gunshot wounds in his home in the wealthy al-Masbah neighborhood of al-Jadriyah, Baghdad, where the villa he lived in was owned by the Mukhabarat, or Iraqi secret service. [14]

Iraq’s chief of intelligence, Taher Jalil Habbush, held a press conference on August 21, at which he handed out photographs of Abu Nidal’s bloodied body, along with a medical report purportedly showing he had died after a single bullet had entered his mouth and exited his skull. Habbush said that Iraq’s internal security force had arrived at Abu Nidal’s house to arrest him on suspicion of conspiring with the Kuwaiti and Saudi governments to bring down Saddam Hussein. Saying he needed a change of clothes, Abu Nidal went into his bedroom and shot himself in the mouth, Habbush said. He died eight hours later in intensive care. [15] He is known to have been suffering from leukemia, though this has not been cited as a contributory factor in his alleged suicide.

Palestinian sources, however, told journalists that Abu Nidal had died of multiple gunshot wounds. Jane’s reported that Iraqi intelligence had been following him for several months and had found classified documents in his home about a U.S. attack on Iraq. When they arrived to raid his house on August 14 (not 16 August, according to Jane’s), fighting broke out between the ANO and Iraqi intelligence. In the midst of this, Abu Nidal rushed into his bedroom and died, though Jane’s writes that it remains unclear whether he killed himself in there or was killed by someone else. Jane’s sources insist that his body bore several gunshot wounds. Jane’s further suggests that Saddam may have ordered him arrested and killed because Abu Nidal was a mercenary who would have acted against Saddam in the event of an American invasion, had the money been right. [16]

So we can infer from this that Saddam likely had Nidal killed because he feared Nidal would work for the U.S.! Not exactly the kind of harboring the U.S. wants us to believe was going on, now is it?

By Dave from the Lake Effect Zone

October 28, 2005 10:10 AM | Link to this

By Outraged

October 27, 2005 03:55 PM | Link to this

Why? So morons like you can have the freedom to ask stupid questions and not get your head cut off. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ We had that freedom BEFORE we decided to go after Saddam Hussein. We would have had it even if we decided that it would be far more prudent just to keep a tighter lid on Saddam Hussein until he died of old age, something we probably could have accomplished for a single year’s outlay for our current operations in Iraq.

While it is true that “freedom isn’t free,” it doesn’t have to be anywhere near so damned expensive, either. Is there any reason we have to spend more on our military than every other country on Earth put together? Where is the threat the justifies this? I think a large majority of posters here would agree that we are not getting our money’s worth, both in terms of treasure and blood. Not even close.

By JMR

October 28, 2005 10:32 AM | Link to this

Troops die when they are told to die-end of story. In every conflict they are sent to meet arms or resistance at the behest of a civilliam administration which seeks to protect the citizenry, uphold our national values and act as a force for good. It would be so easy to beleive that Iraq was a threat to US security, if one were to simply beleive the facts as presented by the administration. Saddam was a bad man. We know thousands who have received our succor in the past. Saddam used nasty weapons on his own people. Nothing new, including weapons our own nation has financed and given to bad leaders. Saddam refused to abide by international bodies rulings. So have we. Saddam supports terrorists. Fort Benning, Georgia is currently under congressinal scrutiny for it’s tax supprted role in educating the officers who led death squads in El Salvador and executed jornalists and poloticians in Chile, Guatemala and Nicuaragua. There exists no reasonable argument for this Iraq conflict. Only emotional ones. So, our sons and daughters die when they are told to. And they go to their ends rightly believing that they secure our freedom by their sacrifce. Let us not confuse the freedom they secure for us though. An Iraq under the strife of civil war and a hotbed for terrorists is no answer to our security, and no balm for the wounds of the fallen. Today they fight to protect their buddies and get the hell out of this mess. But in fighting and dying, they do also place their sacrifice in the long line of American patriots who have died for something higher than the mortal cnflicts they found themeselves in. They secure us the freedom to use reason in the governance of our affairs, rather than pandering to emotion and guess work. They secure us the freedom to question those who hold power, even when it is unpopuar to do so because it might seem unsupportive. What greater support is there than to reign in those whose job it is to listen to the will of the governed? Our soldiers secure for us the eternal right, not even a freedom, a right- to ask why do you do this? For what casue? For whose benefit, and with what justification. The adminsitration continues to fail at justification for this war, yet our children continue to give us security to press the case- with their blood nd pain they secure our American freedome to hold our leaders responsible for their actions in our name. Do not fear those who retreat to the easy answers; Their cowardice reveals their weakness and their weakness performs like a scared dog, nasty and brutish. They snip and bite and whine when conrnered or questioned. Dire times require patriots of substantial will; Lets not let the mongrels rule the day and smudge the true sacrifce of our soldiers. They risk life and limb today so that we can always ask the eternal democratic question to those in power: WHY?

By geotrox

October 28, 2005 11:02 AM | Link to this

My blood just boils everytime I hear some Shrub supporter fall back on simplistic jingoism, like “Freedom isn’t free” or “My country… Love it or leave it”. The “We’re fighting there so we don’t have to fight them here” argument is really an ignorant comment too, because what’s really to stop them from doing both? Just because we haven’t had an attack here since 9/11 doesn’t mean they can’t mount one in the future. You can’t prove a negative. We are not safer now. I figure Al Qaeda hasn’t attacked here since because because Bush is doing such a bang-up job himself. OBL is just sitting back and watching W implode. OBL wanted W to be reelected so he could see him fail in the heart of his presidency. They didn’t attack us on 9/11 because they hate us for of freedom. Jeez! Why not Canada or Switzerland in that case? The mostly SAUDI 9/11 attackers hated us for our policies of supporting the depotic regimes, troops in Saudi Arabia, etc. Yes, Saddam was a bad man and a dictator, but last I heard the Saudi monarchy is in many ways is no better than Saddam. And unless I’m mistaken, a ruling monarchy is just a dictatorship by another name. None of you Bushies seem to want to ask any hard questions and accept anything that comes from this administration as gospel. Wake up you sheeple!!! Terrorism is an idea and you cannot simply fight terrorism by bombing and trying to kill every terrorist. We cannot “win” the WOT without itegrating social, political, diplomatic and economic stratgies into the equation. The policy thus far has been like pounding a bead of mercury and breaking it into a thousand pieces, making it harder to find it all and even harder to clean up. Yes I have nothing but contempt for this admin because I have been and am now being lied too. It’ll be interesting to see history’s take on this 20-30 years from now when all the facts really come out and how we were all duped so tragically.

By ian lowson

October 28, 2005 11:31 AM | Link to this

What a magnificent Lubovich cartoon (WHY)! It doesn’t need the question mark. There are 2000 of them - every one a reproach to the warmongers and conmen who rule us. Better than commemorative marble walls, a marvellous condensation of nominal death and needless sacrifice! It would take even longer to inscribe 100,000 collateral corpses, and besides we don’t know their language, the meaning of their names, nor their reason for dying.

By Heidi

October 28, 2005 11:48 AM | Link to this

woah woah woah…ummm…WMD??? um if i remember right we didn’t find any…so what gave us the right to STAY?…i have lost friends over there…as have many my age (i am 22)…i don’t know why we had to lose so many either…my only question is what happenned to Osama? last i checkd he admitted to being behind 9/11…i think i know the answer to this guy’s question…Bush couldn’t risk having someone killed who’s in the same family HIS family does business with…so Iraq became a distraction…a lot of forgotten Osama’s name cause we’ve been so busy in Iraq…………

By Fred from Garrison, NY

October 28, 2005 11:53 AM | Link to this

Thank you, Mike, for your lovingly painstaking, tribute to our fallen heroes. I think I detected more than a couple of tears on the page.

By SteveSC

October 28, 2005 11:58 AM | Link to this

Watching this back-and-forth reminds of what my grandaddy said forty years ago: “A man who’s got to use profanity or insults has already lost the argument.”

By Shawn Ryan

October 28, 2005 12:03 PM | Link to this

Why? Because it’s a damn fine cartoon. Folks who throw up the “tasteless” argument are straw grabbers scrambling for a way to blindly support their conservativism. They’d support the war and Bush if he gunned down a room full of kindergartners and said he had to because they were terrorists in training.

By sodapants

October 28, 2005 12:07 PM | Link to this

Hmmm…

Ok, Bubba. Was Bill Clinton fined or disbarred? Or both? And if so, why?

Now, I realize that you in the communist party are upset and bitter about that whole affair, so i’ll give your whining a little latitude.

Oh! And then there’s this little gem.

“The reasons the neocons have such a strangle hold on the government currently is because they’ve cheated, lied, smeared, “swift boatedâ€?, defrauded, fear mongered and gerrymandered to win elections.”

LOL You useless hippy. Is that the reason democrats absolutely refuse support law that would make people show PROOF of who they are before voting? C’mon, Bubba. We both know that any ID requirement would seriously injure the democrat fraud machine. That’s why they don’t want any requirements on voting. That’s why they propose law that would allow felons to vote.
Most convicted criminals are democrats, and they know this which is why they want to allow ‘em a vote! LOL
You turds will do anything…. and it’s pretty shameful.

By Tim Sweeney

October 28, 2005 12:18 PM | Link to this

Mike Lukovich, and the many positive comments on this website, give me hope for the State of Georgia. Hope that there are people in the south who read widely, think about what they hear and read, analyze and question, and who are willing to address their fears and the consequences of their actions before ever ever considering threatening anyone’s life. Congratulations to the Atlanta Journal Constitution for printing it.

By EdnaM

October 28, 2005 12:40 PM | Link to this

Sometimes you have to do what is right, and moral. Sometimes you have to fight for what you believe in.
Some people may not understand this, but what was happening over there was wrong. I (personally) like to see women allowed and education, which they weren’t. I (personally) like to see the poor fed, and know that the laws are the same for me as for you. I (personally) hate that they burn women or stone them, for looking at other people, be they women or men.
If you don’t see any problems with this…I feel pity for you.

That was Iraq. It was a problem. To those who are against the war, shut up.

To those brave people who fight for what for us, and them. Thank you! I can not ever thank you enough. I hope for your safety, and return home, but thank you! God Bless! Edna

By Judith

October 28, 2005 12:52 PM | Link to this

Excellent question, and one for which the administration has given varying answers. Hussein is a despicable person, so why did we supply the weapons and hold his coat while he was gassing Iran and his people? My son is due for his third tour over there in December, and I’m sick of the lies that continue to send our precious people into harm’s way.

By Mark

October 28, 2005 01:34 PM | Link to this

To those who are against the war, shut up.

Land of the free, home of the brave indeed.

By Mark

October 28, 2005 01:48 PM | Link to this

Why don’t you ask some of the soldiers who are fighting in Iraq? Even some who have sacrificed their lives have left moving testimonials.

Why are you so lazy?

Why aren’t you concerned about the thousands of American soldiers still fighting in Bosnia?

Why do you post this cartoon? You don’t really care about the soldiers do you?

Why? Why? Why?

By Jay

October 28, 2005 02:05 PM | Link to this

Sure Dave, I don’t doubt your quest for lepers and unicorns. But I doubt that Saddam left any evidence on the shelf in his palace. It is possible that evidence could be hid in Syria or the desert but you would be too close minded to take that into consideration as it would discredit all the “War for Oil” and “Bush Lied” B.S. You would rather take the word of Saddam I suppose.

By simon

October 28, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this

EdnaM:

That place you just described is called Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. You know, the place where 15 of the 19 9/11 hijackers came from (none were Iraqi, btw). In Iraq women were able to obtain an education and did not have to wear the Burka. You see Iraq was a lot more progressive than most of the other Middle Eastern countries, in spite of it’s dictator. Well, at least before we invaded and created another Islamic Republic ala Iran. Perhaps you should try educating yourself.

By Mark

October 28, 2005 02:13 PM | Link to this

Memo to all Chickenhawks and Brownshirts:

While those of us with the capacity for critical thought have known from the get-go that the Bush administration gangsters’ justifications for the war in Iraq were just laughable, the dupes that make up the bulk of American society are about to get clued in. One pig has been indicted, and the rest of the lies will trickle out as the investigation continues, and as the normally-compliant press finally starts digging into the most outrageous crime in modern U.S. history.

Also, if you really want to help the pigs in the Bush administration and Congress (and yes, this includes so-called liberals and Democrats who allowed the Bush thugs to lie their way to war) I recommend paying a visit to your local Army recruiter - they always need more cannon-fodder for their endless and unwinnable conflict in Iraq.

No, I don’t support the troops. But I would support any chickenhawks and brownshirt cowards who’d like to sign up to sacrifice themselves for Freedom and Democracy(tm) in Iraq. I’ll help you pack.

By Gjensen

October 28, 2005 02:34 PM | Link to this

We don’t have to ask WHY. The names should have spelled out OIL.

By Matt

October 28, 2005 02:48 PM | Link to this

Mark, I am so glad that you represent a small fraction of America. To call our troops cannon fodder is disgusting. I can tell that you consider yourself better and smarter than most Americans since you think most Americans are dupes. If there were more people like you this country would be a lot worse off.

By JR Richardson

October 28, 2005 02:49 PM | Link to this

According to 2000’s Uncle, the entire passage of the letter read like this:

I think that pretty much answers the question.

By Joe Schmoe

October 28, 2005 03:02 PM | Link to this

First it was “WMD”. Saddam allowing inspections wasn’t good enough. Then it was “liberating the Iraqi people”. It’s just a coincidence that we happen to choose the second-largest oil field to liberate? And just like with Osama, Saddam was our ally, and the most support we gave him was when “he was gassing his own people”. Who sold him the gas? Who let him use US satellites?

Our country props up dictatorships the world over and always has, if it’s in our “national interests”. We orchestrate coups to overthrow democracies and install dictatorships. You are deluded if you think we are some altruistic freer of the world’s people.

Those of you who say we can’t question this war while “boots are on the ground” — this is a free country, it’s supposedly a democracy, and we have not just a right but an obligation to question things we think our government is doing wrong. We are all citizens and are responsible for the terrible things our country is doing around the world. If we are real patriots, we want this country to be the best it can be, and we have to let it know when it’s doing something wrong.

We don’t even count the Iraqi civilians and soldiers we kill. We bomb their cities and use depleted uranium shells, poisoning their environment for thousands of years to come. How can you believe we’re trying to help these people? I wish we were, but our corrupt government has very different motives.

By khjfk

October 28, 2005 03:13 PM | Link to this

If to call our troops “cannon fodder” is disgusting, what word do you have for those who lie them into an unneccessary war, cut their health benefits and combat pay and refuse to give them sufficient armor for their bodies or their humvees?

“Bush Administration”. Not just a bad President, but a criminal enterprise on steroids. This President makes Reagan look smart, Nixon look honest, and his Dad look eloquent. Most of his former supporters have abondoned him. Only the dregs are left, and they all post here.
By the way, this is not Anti-Americanism. It is Pro-American to be anti this gang of thieves.

By Phaedrus

October 28, 2005 03:35 PM | Link to this

Some have said that a cartoon like this disrespects soldiers on the ground. I think not, as the soldiers themselves often ask the same question. Since they are the ones risking their lives in the imediate sense, I am sure they ask it harder than any of us. Good job Mike.

By A born again Christian Demorcrat

October 28, 2005 04:10 PM | Link to this

If “W” thinks this war is so necessary to save a country thousands of miles from America why hasn’t he sent his own two little chubbies into it? And all of Jeb’s druggies and Cheney’s gay one? They are all of the age to go to war. Not flying around acting “cute” like our “fearless” President did, going AWOL for months and no punishment of any kind. Any one else would have been court marshalled and given a dishonorable discharge. I support our troops because they have no choice, but I do not support the liars and cheats in the leader ship of our country. They think all they have to do is put God’s name in a sentence they speak and our country falls at their feet. They have the nerve to imply that you are not a christian if you do not agree with everything this arrogant “little Ceasar” lies to us.

By Sean Reynolds

October 28, 2005 04:26 PM | Link to this

Hi, just two small comments:

Somebody above wrote “the inspectors were asked to leave Iraq before Clinton’s Operation Desert Fox”. The sad fact is, we were the ones who asked them. The prevailing myth is that Desert Fox was some kind of response to Saddam’s ouster of the inspectors, but the historical fact is that we told our inspectors, “we’re going to bomb, so get out now.” At least that’s what the inspectors themselves say. We pulled them because we wanted to bomb. End of story.

The second comment: Johns Hopkins University and the world’s leading medical journal, the Lancet, produced a scientific study which estimated 98,000 deaths over the first 18-odd months of fighting that weren’t happening before the war. If you add in another 100,000 for the folks our sanctions were killing every year before the fighting started, then add even half of that total for the full year since the Lancet study, you get 300,000 total, or three nine-elevens’ worth of people, mostly the civilians we were “trying to liberate.” From what - from breathing? I’d suggest another cartoon but they’d have to give you the whole paper, wouldn’t they?

Finally, most Americans want the troops pulled out now, most Americans believe Bush lied to them to get them into the war, and most Americans believed it was a big mistake. Extrapolate that to the soldiers - they’re Americans, too - and you’re disrespecting most soldiers in defending this war.

Mike, bless you for your compassion for our soldiers and for your courage in helping to stop this war.

By kate

October 28, 2005 04:46 PM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Luckovich,

You are an embarrassment to this country.

By Jammie

October 28, 2005 05:02 PM | Link to this

I think there are many people asking “why”. I’m still asking why Bush got in office the first time, and then why in the world he would be elected again. And I am counting the days until we can get him out of office. The whole war is insane. Bush is fighting for oil, for money, for power. And he’s sacraficing US to do it. Our kids, our fathers, mothers, sisters, etc. are dying for greed. It’s horrible.

By farhad

October 28, 2005 05:06 PM | Link to this

I commend Mike, and remind everyone that a lot more than 2000 Iraqis and Afghanis died too.

May they all rest in peace.

By TrueConservative

October 28, 2005 05:15 PM | Link to this

43Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy.

44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

By Jackal

October 28, 2005 05:49 PM | Link to this

I am a U.S. Army Soldier who returned from Iraq in March of this year. I was there during OIF II when the real fighting began and saw things that I will never forget. In the military it really doesn’t matter what your political party is, because you fight the same enemy with the same means as everyone else. It does disturb me that so many people who never served, never volunteered, never bothered to encourage one of their family members to join, have so much to say about the way my fellow soldiers and I feel about comments made about this war. We didn’t ask to go, and we didn’t run away when the time came. This is what we do, this is our call to duty. That being said, don’t tell me how I feel about protests, and don’t tell me that I was disrespected when someone questioned why I was there. That my fellow citizens, Democrat and Republican, is what America is all about. Accounting for the actions of OUR nation as a whole. If someone in your family did something offensive to someone else should you not be the first to chastize them, or would you let your neighbors take the responsibility for that? I fought the war and I returned, some of my friends did not. I fought for them more than anything else, not for some religious ideals or one man’s opinion about another man’s culture and lifestyle. So stop making generalizations. I saw soldiers who usually vote Republican at the time of filling out absentee ballots question everything the thought about the President and what we were doing because they knew first hand the consequences of fighting for a lie. Don’t assume that Democrats are not patriots and don’t assume Republicans are blind cattle following the President no matter where he decides to send us. I am an American Citizen first, Soldier Second. The question was WHY? Why not try and find a better solution, instead of beating up on each other. The first thing you will have to do is see things for what they really are, don’t let FOX News give you the soundbite of the day as your only means to explain a situation. Thank you Mike for asking the question no one can seem to ask and no one knows the answer. Here’s something for everyone…. THINK!!!

By TrueConservative

October 28, 2005 06:38 PM | Link to this

thank you Jackal…for everything

this culture was escilates because instead of respecting the views of others (even though you may disagree) we attack each other- this way we just stay angry at the ‘other side’ and never reach any compremise at all and all the while amoral politicians and corporations get richer and richer on american blood- if you want to call yourself a patriot respect the freedom of expression guarenteed to your fellow citizens by the bill of rights. ‘conservatives’ wave a bible around while they make war on their fellow citizens. ‘Liberals’ are against the war but also make war on their fellow citizens, and both sides think they can stomp the other out and have it all their way- without comprimise there can be no democracy so stop attacking each others and lets exchange some ideas here- what do you think would happen if the people compremised and marched on washington together? as a Nation again. we are all americans here and unless you can dispense with this idea of the ‘the other side’ this culture war will only get worse

many of you disagree with me on many points but you are all my countrymen- it is in this spirit that I plea for our unity. I would not call myself a Christian but I will leave you with the words of Jesus- 44But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;

45That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust.

By TomP

October 28, 2005 07:35 PM | Link to this

I have your answer.

The 2000th military death in Irag has a name: Cpl. Jeffery Starr. In anticipation of his death, he left a letter for his girlfriend on his laptop.

Here’s an excerpt you might not be interested in, but it contains the answer to your question.

“Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I’m writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances. I don’t regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it’s not to me. I’m here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.”

He knew the answer, and what it might cost. You should be ashamed for misusing his name.

By Bob

October 28, 2005 09:54 PM | Link to this

Somewhere, in that “Why?”, made up of names of heroes whose permission you never received to be used in your disgusting political purpose, is one Marine Cpl. Jeffrey P. Starr. Cpl Starr wrote this to his girlfriend to be read in the event he was killed:

“Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I’m writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances. I don’t regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it’s not to me. I’m here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.”

As the proud father of a Marine serving in Iraq, a young man who after graduating from college enlisted, not as an officer, but from the ‘bottom up’, advise “Mike”, whom I most certainly don’t like, to read Cpl. Starr’s words carefully. They express more eloquently than idiot “journalists” sitting at their keyboards can ever hope to, exactly “Why”

By John

October 28, 2005 10:38 PM | Link to this

There’s nothing disgusting, sir, about what Mike created. What’s disgusting is your blindness to a war that is costing lives of Americans because of misinterpreted or willfully mis-read intelligence. We can’t mourn soldiers who die because we can’t see them come back home in coffins - instead this adminstration has created a sort Orwellian reality where we never see the results of our countries actions and we are not asked to understand the price daily. I admire soldiers who die for our country, and treat our enemy as a human being. I do not respect the soldiers who choose to use their power for torture - these people fullfill the vision of the terrorists of America as “The Great Satan.” I only wish that the same freedoms you claim in Cpl. Starr’s words applied to everyone - including the “idiot journalist.” Instead your vehement attack cheapens his memory and your own opinion.

By Coling

October 29, 2005 12:29 AM | Link to this

Interesting responses, can’t believe there are so many fools who think Iraq is not encouraging the next 9/11. But with there support for the conquest we’ll all enjoy the fall out together.

By Marion of Texas

October 29, 2005 02:34 AM | Link to this

Very moving political cartoon! Thank you Mike Lukovich. Here are my answers to “Why”: So Halliburton could reap billions in profits. For our oil companies to have record profits. For the rich to get richer at the expense of our children and grand-children who will be paying for Bush’s war for decades to come.

When chickenhawks (who either dodged service in Viet Nam — Bush — or in our Armed Forces — Cheney and Rumsfeld) decide to start a war, they and their children do not pay the price. Sadly, it is the rest of us, our children, and our grandchildren who pay the price. Two thousand lives is two thousand too many.

By hank

October 29, 2005 06:07 AM | Link to this

Is that the reason democrats absolutely refuse support law that would make people show PROOF of who they are before voting? C’mon, Bubba. We both know that any ID requirement would seriously injure the democrat fraud machine. That’s why they don’t want any requirements on voting. That’s why they propose law that would allow felons to vote. Most convicted criminals are democrats, and they know this which is why they want to allow ‘em a vote!

Is this your version of “facts”? What an idiot. I would venture to guess that election fraud has probably been perpetrated by people of both parties, at various times. The greatest issue of concern at present is national elections of course. And the greatest concern is the voting systems and counting methods where problems were so glaring in 2000 in Florida and 2004 in Ohio. Those problems are huge compared to the “red herring” of individual voter identification. Any fraud in that arena these days is probably miniscule compared to the other.

The reason many representatives oppose individual voter identification is that it would essentially amount to a “poll tax” for some. Many people in this country do not have a driver’s license, or a state issued ID card, and some can’t afford them.

The voter ID problem is a band-aid solution to what may be a systemic problem that wouldn’t even be remotely solved by addressing that issue alone, and many reps are smart enough to know that.

As for Clinton, he was fined by a federal judge for civil contempt of court. It was not a criminal issue. And he agreed to a suspension of his law license for five years when Starr offered that as a condition to discontinue invesitgating him and his family. Since the only person in the Clinton admin to be indicted (Cisneros, who was indicted after he resigned for something unrelated to his duties as HUD sec.) was investigated from 1992 until this month…thirteen years. I think Clinton made the right choice, along with voluntarily resigning from the Arkansas supreme court bar.

Not that your rantings have anything to do with the topic of this thread, nutjob.

By The Wise One

October 29, 2005 10:16 AM | Link to this

The only bad guys in Iraq are the ones we created through bad foreign policy decisions. We create more insurgents every day. If our goal is to kill them all, we will be there a very, very long time.

It’s just unreal that we’ve repeated our Vietnam war mistakes all over again.

But since Bush didn’t fight in Vietnam, nor did any of his chicken hawk administration, I guess he didn’t learn that lesson.

By Sandy heilman

October 29, 2005 12:19 PM | Link to this

Obviously Mike, you don’t appreciate your freedom. Do you think rights and privledges in the US just happened? Would you rather “they” attack on our homeland? Have you fogotten USS Cole, World Trade Center, 9/11? Is that what you want? How many names would be in a “WHY” of 9/11? You are ungrateful and don’t deserve what has been earned for you.

By Dan

October 29, 2005 01:04 PM | Link to this

Obviously, Sandy, you don’t appreciate this country’s history. “Freedom” includes the freedom to dissent, and a government “of the people, by the people, and for the people” includes those who question the decisions of our leaders.

America was founded on dissent. Freedom is based on open exchange of ideas. Without them, “freedom” is just a talking point.

By Alexander, The Skull

October 29, 2005 03:17 PM | Link to this

I think that if the guy is gonna make a mural of all of America’s dead, he should start from the birth of this nation, excluding names from the Revolutionary, 1812, and WWII, because if he’s questioning the validity of this war, why not every other war without a clear purpose we’ve ever been involved with? - How dare he exclude every other fallen soldier? Is he honoring the men and women dead in Iraq? Or is he just using shameless macabre to validate his “point”? Which brings us back to step one: ‘What is the point?’…

You may ask me: “Alexander - what’s your point?”… My point is that the artist dosn’t have one; you can make a point through a question, but one so vague as “why?” - that is pureile at best, no more mature than an 11 year old that abuses the word “why?” to the point of it becoming meaningless, an 11 year old will become annoying at about the 7th or 8th repetition, but at least that same child will tire and eventually stop after [at the very worst] the 50th.

Consider hearing that same word, that one word question… 2,000 times.

But… if the question “why?” must be answered, each and every time, for each and every soldier, then I will gladly, and proudly answer it.

“Why?” - “Because he/she was a soldier. Because that’s what soldiers do. War is nothing but old men talking and young men dying, always was, always will be.”

By RW

October 29, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this

Dear Marion, Web Hubbell thanks you for your list of talking points that omitted his tenure in prison. And the case was a civil case, but Clinton’s statement was indeed criminal (that’s why he paid a fine…he did a boo-boo). Nice try, hon, but in case you haven’t checked the elections lately (and it appears that you’re busy writing them off as being ‘stolen’), no one’s buying it but you and your fellow eschaton echo-chamber residents.

By Right Said Fred

October 29, 2005 08:42 PM | Link to this

“freedom” = oil

By Dan

October 30, 2005 09:55 AM | Link to this

Will someone please tell me what there is about Bush to like? Dan

By Pey

October 30, 2005 02:47 PM | Link to this

Want to help end the war? Drive out the Bush Regime!

Protest this Wednesday - November 2nd, Downtown Atlanta, Woodruff park, 1 pm.

More information here and here

By Dusty

October 30, 2005 03:29 PM | Link to this

Sure, come on down town for an ANTI-WAR, hate the troops, rip democracy and dump our elected officials SIDE SHOW. You might even get your picture taken with Cindy Sheehan, Jane Fonda or that paid-dissident Mike Luckovich. He might even sell you some of his exciting anti-war posters, ‘specially the one listing dead soldiers. Don’t miss it. There will be free popcorn, free cotton candy and loads of free propaganda. Get your picture on the front page of AJC. You’ll be famous!

By Donald Coover

October 30, 2005 05:30 PM | Link to this

If you have to ask WHY,you are as stupid as Cindy Sheehan.

By Jesus Bristow

October 30, 2005 08:46 PM | Link to this

I know why Mike, and so do you…

By Jackson

October 30, 2005 09:51 PM | Link to this

I wonder if Mike knows a single person in his cartoon personally. I doubt it. Maybe if he did he wouldn’t have felt the need to making a cartoon out of their deaths. If you look very closely you’ll see the name of my cousin. He volunteered to serve his country. He served it proudly. AND he served it to allow people like Mike the freedom to belittle his death by making it a cartoon. Hope you’re proud of YOUR service, Mike.

By John in Mableton

October 30, 2005 10:16 PM | Link to this

Morons! No one can address the questions?

Why? To keep Oil Company profits sky high! Oh, some say, its only 13% of the worlds supply. In a tight market, 13% is a bunch of influence

Why? To keep Halbuton and Co. profits sky high! Oh, I’ll bet nobody knows of anybodies ties to them in the administration? And why they are awarded contracts with no bidding?

Why? Because if Iraq can’t produce oil, it makes everybody’s else oil more expensive, hence more profitable. Why else would you go into a war you know you don’t need with not enough troops to secure the peace?

Ohh, utter silence on this point. Excuse me, this is the point! If they believed the information they cherry picked for the weapons of mass destruction, why wouldn’t they believe the information about the resistance they would encounter that was the widely held view? Anyone growing a brain stem out there?

They lied, they cherry picked the information and they made up the story to make the situation exactly what it is. They wouldn’t do that you say? Prove it. I can prove the above, can you prove otherwise?

Morons to the right of me and idiots to the left of me! Go get an education you nuts.

By VanessaG

October 30, 2005 11:17 PM | Link to this

That cartoon made me want to cry. This thread also made me want to cry. It is so depressing to see how divided we are. After it has been proven that there are NO WMD’s, that the Whitehouse is at odds with the CIA since they told them that Saddam had no WMD’s. They even outed a covert CIA operative to get back at Joe Wilson who TOLD THE TRUTH! It shows you what lengths this administration will go to justify this illegal, immoral war.

Have any of you read PNAC? I recommend you do since it will answer ‘WHY’? The information is out there and those of you who refuse to believe it, I truly feel sorry for you. You also sicken me with your willful ignorance but I also pity you—you are in some really amazing denial. It is also because of you, this country is going to hell in a handbasket. Stupidity really does kill.

I love this country and if I didn’t, I would not care about this war and the thousands killed. YOU, Bush-supporters, are un-American.

By viktor

October 31, 2005 07:52 AM | Link to this

VanessaG,

You need an education. Start here:

http://www.globalsecurity.org/intell/library/congress/2004rpt/iraq-wmd-intelltoc.htm

You will find that Wilson was a liar telling half truths to support his political agenda - and, ultimately, his book. Wilson lied then and continues to lie in the face of the Senate Intelligence Committee findings. Only the liberal press and Bush haters will give him the time of day…they like liars who support their anti-Bush and anti-war agendas.

You will also find that the administration was acting in good faith on strong intelligence that indicated Saddam was up to no good. And that the administration did not pressure the intelligence community to mold the intelligence to suit their purposes.

How do you know that Valerie Flame was covert? Seems to anyone with half a brain that if that was the case, charges would have been brought.

You’re right about one thing: your stupidity and anti-war crap will kill our soldiers who are now in harms way.

So, John in Mableton, another spin on “it’s all about the oil” and corporate profits? Is there a wingnut factory that all you conspiracy theorists come from? First it was our coveting Iraqi oil reserves and now it’s all about our throttling Iraqi oil? How about China consuming record levels of oil? How about our limited refining capacity? Talk about a moron! I like your tin foil hat there, John.

By Clint Conatser

October 31, 2005 08:43 AM | Link to this

Here is why, from a letter that a soldier killed in Iraq left on his laptop for his girlfriend to find after his death:

“Obviously if you are reading this then I have died in Iraq. I kind of predicted this, that is why I’m writing this in November. A third time just seemed like I’m pushing my chances. I don’t regret going, everybody dies but few get to do it for something as important as freedom. It may seem confusing why we are in Iraq, it’s not to me. I’m here helping these people, so that they can live the way we live. Not have to worry about tyrants or vicious dictators. To do what they want with their lives. To me that is why I died. Others have died for my freedom, now this is my mark.”

Sad that this didn’t prevent Mike Lukovich from using his death to make a (very weak) political point.

By JimB

October 31, 2005 08:53 AM | Link to this

Mike, Good job at getting readers to face the question: “Why”. We need more political cartoons like this one. Reminds me of the movie “Easy Rider” where Jack Nicholson’s character said that some people have to punch other people in the face to convince themselves they’re on the side of Freedom.

By Midori

October 31, 2005 11:18 AM | Link to this

Viktor,

The part of the senate report that discussed Wilson was an ADDENDUM to the report that was signed by only THREE Republican senators(Senators Roberts, Bond and Hatch), not even all the GOPs on the committee agreed to it along with NO Democrats.

It is clear to many of us that Pat Roberts used this addendum to PLANT talkng points against Wilson to protect the WH and further the perception in the RW media that Wilson was the one lying.

http://noquarter.typepad.com/myweblog/2005/10/updateonthel.html

By Ricky

October 31, 2005 12:16 PM | Link to this

Midori, obviously Joe Wilson was lying when he claimed that the White House outed his wife. Woops. That wasn’t true either. I know you were all craving indictments for leaking a CIA agents name for Rove and Libby, but a fair investigation found that they had done nothing wrong. Now I know you are going to turn your attention to Judge Alito and talk about how this administration is packing the court with right wing extremists. But, wait, two Democratic Senates approved him unamiously twice before. Going to be tough to win this battle for you. And even though Schumer, Kennedy, and Durbin are going to vote no regardless of who the candidate is, you are going to lose the battle on this on too. The Democrats nomiated Ruth Bader Ginsburg, someone way left, former General Counsel of the ACLU and she received 97 votes. Why? Because even though Republicans disagreed with her, the acknowledged she was qualified. Lets see if the Dems can resist the special interests and vote according to qualifications not a litmus test

By Midori

October 31, 2005 01:36 PM | Link to this

I really don’t care about Judge Alito, BTW. I’ll decide on that issue in due time. However, your rant about “litmus tests” shows your hypocrisy. Isn’t that what you guys were yelling about Miers? Didn’t you have several “litmus tests” for her?

Your comprehension skills are suspect, too.

The investigation did NOT conclude those men did nothing wrong.

Fitzgerald was all about what he could PROVE.

He can prove Libby, et all are all lying scumbags. This is why Libby was indicted. Why was he indicted if he did nothing wrong?

And the investigation continues. Fitzgerald himself said that the woman’s cover was blown.

You people are scary, Ricky.

You fall all over yourselves defending lying traitors who put the national security of this country at risk.

Lying, murderous traitors. Good company you keep.

Did you watch 60 Minutes last night?

Do your country a favor. Educate yourself: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2005/10/30.html#a5624

By Ricky

October 31, 2005 02:18 PM | Link to this

Midori, I have no litmus test. My only concern is a qualified judge. If Miers had acquitted herself during the confirmation hearings, I would have supported her. Also, if Republicans had a litmus test why did they all vote for Ginsberg? Becuase she was qualified. Libby was indicted for lying, not for blowing Plame’s cover. If she was so undercover, why could Robert Novak just look her up and find out she worked for the CIA? And like Fitzgerald said, it would take a serious change for him to indict anyone else. And you know what they say, You can indict a ham sandwhich. So all Republicans are lying muderous traitors? Thats a pretty sweep generalization, but I don’t expect much else from you Midori. You like to call us all kinds of names. And your link is to a website that bashes people on the right. Is that credible? They bash Michelle Malkin and Brit Hume, one of the most respected journalists in DC. But once again, I don’t expect much less from you. And by the way, it was Bill Clintons 8 yrs of doing nothing to stop terrorism and withdrawing troops as soon as we took casualties in Somalia that led to the 9/11 attacks. So I am sure that you are proud of your boy. Keep up the propoganda, it helps Republicans continue to get elected.

By Bill

October 31, 2005 02:24 PM | Link to this

First of all, the fact that Mike’s cartoons spark heated disputes underscores the fact that he is indeed a great political cartoonist. You may not agree with his point of view or the point the cartoon is trying to make, but don’t you dare bash his skills.

Secondly, I am sick and tired of hearing people cry about no weapons of mass destruction being found, therefor the war in Iraq was unjust.

Saddam knew trouble was coming to his neighborhood on 9/11 when his neighbor attacked the US. Do you really believe he would just sit back and do nothing to hide things he wasn’t supposed to have?

If the police called a known drug dealer and told the guy they would be coming to his house next week some time, do you think the dealer would just keep his stash laying around? Heck, his house would be cleaner than Martha Stewart’s!

By James Horobin

October 31, 2005 03:03 PM | Link to this

Unbelievable! Stupenous! Mike Lukovich should get the Pulitzer prize for “WHY?” I am glad we have freedom of thought in this country. If you agree or disagree with the message, we do have the freedom for you to print it and for us to read it. Keep up the wonderful work.

By John in Mableton

October 31, 2005 03:23 PM | Link to this

VanessaG; drunken troll or meth eyed crossdresser?

“You will also find that the administration was acting in good faith on strong intelligence that indicated Saddam was up to no good. And that the administration did not pressure the intelligence ” Oh, chew all the way through the thought before speaking child, please.

If what you say were true, why would they not belive that the heavy resistance predicted by the same sources? Why would they fire the army chief of staff for stating that they would need an army of at least several hundred thousand, possibly 500,000 to secure Iraq?

No, you neither refute, nor can get a whole thought debated. Back to your crack pipe or whatever.

By VanessaG

October 31, 2005 08:19 PM | Link to this

Jesus H. Christ! It is just amazing how the right wingers are twisting this, trying their mightiest to justify the war, the lies and God knows what else. Scary. They all sound so desperate. I would laugh if it weren’t so sad. Please, turn off FAUX News since it causes brain damage.

By VanessaG

October 31, 2005 08:26 PM | Link to this

““You will also find that the administration was acting in good faith on strong intelligence that indicated Saddam was up to no good. And that the administration did not pressure the intelligence â€? Oh, chew all the way through the thought before speaking child, please.”

That was not me who said that. I completely disagree with that statement.

By Julie Zuber

November 1, 2005 02:19 AM | Link to this

Dear Mike: I notice that all the opposing comments are just Republican talking points. People who spew out these tired phrases are just letting others do their thinking for them. I find it frightening. Your editorial cartoon was very meaninful to me and I thank you for providing a PDF for download. I printed it out to frame and hang next to my desk. What an effort of love. God Bless You.

By RW

November 1, 2005 12:45 PM | Link to this

I’m sure it looks great next to the poster of the Indigo Girls.

By Brian T. Osborn

November 1, 2005 04:16 PM | Link to this

Hopefully, with the closed sessions of the Senate beginning today, we will finally find the answer to this question. I believe the American people, especially moderate Republicans, will be enormously disappointed in the answer. The lying, cheating, bullying, and incompetence of this administration must end.

By Rick

November 1, 2005 04:43 PM | Link to this

The reason they have paid the price is so you can draw anything you want. If we don’t defeat them there, then one day the enemy will be here and possibly cut off your head with many others who cherish their right to free speach.

By Mark

November 2, 2005 11:38 AM | Link to this

Great question Mike! It is difficult to keep track of the many different reasons given by the Bush Administration. First, it was because of their WMD’s. But we couldn’t wait for the UN or IAEA to finish their inspections. We already had a military presence in the region. Because of this presence, only an idiot would suggest that Saddam would launch an attack against us. Sure, he could have tried to create a WMD and sell it to a terrorist organization but that would be impossible if we would have used some of the billions wasted in Iraq to create the best intelligence agencies in the world. Second, was because Saddam was a bad guy. No doubt. But there are bad guys in Africa, South America, Far East, Middle East, etc. Using that logic we would be very busy. Then there is the torture issue. Let’s be straight – terrorists do not deserve to live. But if the USA is detaining suspects, we, as the torch bearers of liberty should not torture our enemies. To think that this is the one piece of legislature GW would veto is incredible. The third reason is because we would rather fight them in Iraq rather than in America. Anyone with any common sense can look at the situation in Iraq and say we are creating insurgents with our presence. But again, if we had used the billions spent in Iraq on really securing our borders and beefing up our intelligence agencies we would be better protected against terrorists. Instead, I pray for our troops in Iraq. Since we are there, I hope we can be successful. It’s heartbreaking to think of the pain inflicted on our families. No one wants to go through another horrible day like September 11, but a democracy in Iraq will not eliminate our terrorist enemies.

By clearwater

November 2, 2005 01:04 PM | Link to this

RW -

Thank you for so succinctly illustrating one of the weaknesses of war supporters: Faced with an unpleasantry, you shed rationality and attack:

“I’m sure it looks great next to the poster of the Indigo Girls.”

I’m so embarrassed for you. Is this your best response to someone who is upset about the deaths caused by the war in Iraq? I hope you can do better than flinging a gay accusation - and how out of context is that? - in reply to Julie Zuber’s post. If you can’t do better, God help you and everyone who thinks the way you do. You have to do better. Think about how happy you have just made our enemies when they see you attacking a fellow American. “They” read these things.

By Mickella

November 2, 2005 06:26 PM | Link to this

Right on Mike. To those who say would you rather fight them over here than there? Just what THEM are they talking about? It amazes me how people think invading Iraq did anything to deter terrorism in the USA. Oh yea I forgot Saddam was getting ready to take over the world.

By the way I can’t understand why the President decided it was ok to send our bravest, best, strongest, most patriotic Americans and put them in harm’s way, and try to dupe us all into connecting 9-11 with his plans for Iraq.

By Shaq

November 2, 2005 07:42 PM | Link to this

Who is this guy, hes an idiot. Mike you just need to get your facts straight! THE FACT IS, YOUR A DUMBASS!!

By shaq

November 2, 2005 07:56 PM | Link to this

AND “VOICE OF REASON”, OH MY GOD. You are just a crazy liberal that should be shot!

By shaq

November 2, 2005 08:07 PM | Link to this

ALL YOU LIBERALS SHOULD BE KICKED OUT OF THE COUNTRY THEN SHOT!!! WHAT IN THE WORLD GOT INTO ALL YALLS HEADS? DEFINATLEY NOT SINCE!

By james lee

November 2, 2005 10:09 PM | Link to this

hey shaq come on and try to kick us out of our country, go back to yours and do what we did build a nation. by the way we shoot back where i am from

By Proud Liberal

November 3, 2005 02:38 PM | Link to this

Why, one word, OIL. Anyone who thinks we went there for any other reason is fooling themselves!

By Carole Smock

November 3, 2005 04:55 PM | Link to this

Better than fighting THEM over here??? Who is THEM????Directly from their Talking Points Sheet. I am truly embarrassed for these RRRR’s … God Help Us All. Radical, Right, Religeous, Republicans.

By Evelyn

November 4, 2005 02:28 AM | Link to this

I can’t believe I just spent hours reading this whole string of posts.

There are times when it is instructive to take a dip in the stream of conversation (to use the term about at the limits of its extent) in US politics. I’ve been wondering what the right-wingers’ reality looks like these days, as the people I used to try to talk with “don’t have time� for fact-oriented discussion, and tend to get all heated up and nasty instead of exploring where evidence leads.

I’ve come to believe that there is a big divide between what I see as “evidence-based reality� and “authority-based reality.� If you’re into a scientific world-view and follow the facts, however horrible the conclusions they lead to, and you mention distressing information to those who are in an authority-based belief system, they get angry.

The anger serves to cut them off from having to face the distressing information and process it. It’s a way of avoiding cognitive dissonance.

I’ve gone, in the past 5 years, from politically neutral and fiscally conservative, a fan of the constitution and anti-tax, to being absolutely horrified to see the evil and corruption has taken over this nation’s strength and standing in the world.

An America with any moral authority is one with clean hands, not an America that flouts the Geneva Conventions and looks for ways to torture in secret hideouts throughout the worlds more miserable places. The America I wish for is one that I can trust and respect, not one with shifting excuses for conquest that a child can see are wrong. The America that can win hearts and minds can not be the same America that lies and cheats, kills little children and women, claims them among the bodycount of “insurgents� and pretends that insurgents are the same as “terrorists.�

No one has mentioned the Carlyle Group. Lets not forget them. And lets not forget Operation Northwoods, the facts of the FIRST Pearl Harbor, or the many reasons that the official conspiracy theory attempting to explain the events of 9/11/01 is among the least believable of the many conspiracy theories out there.

It’s a sad, scary world. We aren’t safe in America because we are at the mercy of the cabal that controls the White House. That’s where the terror is coming from. We put Sadam in place, forced him on Iraq, and rewarded him with huge amounts of cash immediately upon his “gassing his own people�. We trained, armed and supported the Taliban. We poured money into making Afghanistan unstable, and provided the radicalizing textbooks to turn a generation of Afghan children into little Jihadists so they would hate the Soviet Infidels. Osama was our buddy, a CIA asset.

What happened on 9/11 is known as “blowback�.

The Cheney/Bush administration knew it was coming. The non-response of NORAD was clearly a stand-down. The normal defenses were de-activated to allow the planes freedom to destroy. There is an overwhelming amount of data supporting this view.

The Neocons spelled out very clearly in the PNAC plan that they needed a new “Pearl Harbor� to enable their actions. They secured their Reichstag Fire. That’s how they got to pile conquest upon outrage.

After 9/11, the Bin Laden family had the good grace to sell off their Carlyle stock. The Bush family did not. The Bush family directly profits from war.

I certainly wish my fellow Americans well, but I just wish more of them could throw off their indoctrination and take a tour of the evidence for various ways of assessing reality. There is pain in learning ugly truths, but it is not as bad as living longer with the ugly, ugly lies that lead them to slaughter.

Evleyn

By Violence Begets

November 4, 2005 02:06 PM | Link to this

As long as we’re asking why, why are the lists of names in this and other commentaries only the Americans killed? Why isn’t the MUCH larger number of Iraqi civilians killed even on our radar screen? We’ve killed about 30,000 - ten times the number of civilians killed in 911. No surprise that Iraq has thus become a terrorist factory. See www.iraqbodycount.com

By Travis

November 4, 2005 02:43 PM | Link to this

Wow. Talk about the same old lame talking points. “It’s the oil!” - There is more oil in the US (ANWR, TX/OK, Gulf of Mexico, etc.) than in Iraq. “Bush lied!” - were Hillary Clinton, Al Gore, and Jay Rockafeller lying when they spoke out against Saddam and said he had WMDs? Were the Brits and the Germans? “We should have let the UN take care of it!” - The same UN that was responsible for the oil-for-food fiasco? The same UN that has done so little in Rwanda, etc.? “It was all a conspiracy!” - PNAC. Carlyle Group. Neocons. They believe in this “conspiracy” the same way those wing-nuts believe that the moon landing was faked. And I guess that PNAC, Bush, Cheney, et al were behind Clinton going into Yugoslavia, right? There is no way that Clinton went after Milosevic (sp?) on humanitarian grounds, right?

Milosevic didn’t attack America. He killed far fewer than Saddam did. But I bet these same people excoriating Bush today were in support of Clinton then.

And that cartoon was disgusting.

By Terri

November 4, 2005 05:45 PM | Link to this

I’m completely mystified by the comments that say “it’s better to fight them over there than here” … Iraq did not have any viable or immiment plan to attack our country - nor any plan that I ever heard. That comment doesn’t even make any sense. Iraq had nothing to do with the terrorist attack we DID have. Bush and buddies attacked Iraq for control of oil.

By Evelyn

November 5, 2005 11:17 AM | Link to this

To: Violence Begets,

A year ago, a study came out which strongly suggested that the Iraq Body Count site is erring on the side of conservatism by only counting deaths it can confirm.

I heard about the study as it was discussed on a recent NPR radio interview. It was conducted using rigorous methods, by people with excellent credentials, who risked their lives to find out what the US military, by policy, will not.

This study was documented in a few newspaper articles on October 29, 2004, for instance, here: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1338749,00.html] “About 100,000 Iraqi civilians - half of them women and children - have died in Iraq since the invasion, mostly as a result of airstrikes by coalition forces, according to the first reliable study of the death toll from Iraqi and US public health experts.

“The study, which was carried out in 33 randomly-chosen neighbourhoods of Iraq representative of the entire population, shows that violence is now the leading cause of death in Iraq. Before the invasion, most people died of heart attacks, stroke and chronic illness. The risk of a violent death is now 58 times higher than it was before the invasion.�

and Here: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A7967-2004Oct28.html]

“One of the first attempts to independently estimate the loss of civilian life from the Iraqi war has concluded that at least 100,000 Iraqi civilians may have died because of the U.S. invasion.

“…many of the excess (sic) deaths have occurred due to aerial attacks by coalition forces, with women and children being frequent victims, wrote the international team of public health researchers making the calculations.�

I think it is reasonable to assume that there have been well over 100,000 civilians killed by this time, over a year after the publication of the study.

By your buddy

November 6, 2005 09:55 PM | Link to this

Mike…you’ve herd from a soldier himself..they have the choice to fight for your freedom. So you decide to mock them and get a buck off righting their names?

By Matty

November 7, 2005 09:11 AM | Link to this

Great question. No doubt these guys gave it all to do their job, but WHY were we lied to? That’s the point here. Why was the W administration so unsure of their position that they had to lie to get what they wanted? Yeah, Saddam was a bad guy. Yeah, the Iraqis had WMDs once. Where did THOSE come from? But this war had nothing to do with 9-11. Nothing. But we’re in it now, aren’t we? Mission accomplished! Jeez. And enough of this crap about the war is being fought because of the principles that this country was founded on. One more thing. Please, people, please learn to SPELL.