Thursday, July 13, 2006

Michael Ramirez Again!

Michael Ramirez--spot on!

(click on cartoon for larger image)

Too funny!


Dan said...

Love 'em. Keep 'em comin'!

terrance said...


I'm glad you like Ramirez. I think he's the best both in what he says and how funny or trenchant he is in saying it.

I laughed out loud at the Canada draft dodgers cartoon.

Noamzinn said...

Q - Why did the chicken cross the border?

A - To avoid participating in a sensless and immoral war.

terrance said...


I'm assuming you're too young to have seen what happened when the US withdrew. The war wasn't senseless or immoral to those who became victims of the "peace".

Probably didn't see the tens of thousands of victims on land and the boat people who died at sea because there was no room for them in the boats that were leaving already overloaded. A cousin was in one of the departing boats and saw the faces of some of those who died at sea. Not a pretty sight--no prettier than the dead and half-dead victims my uncle saw when he liberated a concentration camp near the end of World War II. Sometimes it's heroic to take losses to help those who are helpless.

It's always easy when you forget the victims, isn't it?

Noamzinn said...


Oh, I remember the victims alright - the over 50 thousand American dead soldiers - the hundreds of thousands of American soldiers maimed, crippled or mentally disabled - including two good friends, one of whom died of alcoholism last year and the other who still roams the neighborhood as a tragic space case. I also remember the millions of Vietnamese peasants killed in carpet bombing, village annihilation and chemical defoliation. I urge you to see the documentary "Fog of War" in which Robert McNamara acknowledges his disasterous mistakes as architect of this sad misadventure.

Sure - there are losers and victims in any regime change, but US participation in this internal conflict magnified the destructive consequences by several orders.

terrance said...


Thanks for your comments. You obviously lived through at least part of the Viet Nam war period. My brother served in Viet Nam.

If you notice on my sidebar, I list the casualties in recent US wars--including Viet Nam (about 90,000; the link notes that about 47,000 of those were battle deaths). That's a lot of casualties, but a lot fewer than in World War II, where Germany inflicted almost no damage on the U.S., and Japan's strike at Pearl Harbor caused fewer deaths than 9/11.

Was British and French freedom really worth millions of casualties--both Allied and Axis military and civilian--not to mention casualties of the neutrals? Why be concerned about the victims of concentration camps?

You may be right that it is best never to care about what happens to others outside our border unless it is a painless remedy.

What Pol Pot did in Cambodia could be A-Ok--as was what happened in South Vietnam after our withdrawal. Or what happened in Rwanda, or to the Kurds, or is happening in Darfur. When does intervening in what is happening to others become something sensible and moral? Or is it never right to intervene if the costs are other than minimal?