Cox and forkum are very cutting. btw, they don't mind if you link their stuff, so long as you dont' edit it in any way...
That said...I thought this one was very cutting. As was the associated commentary.
They obviously fell for the propaganda that Saddam was a supporter of Al Quaida.
http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/Innocents-X.gif
Depends on when the cartoon was produced. Iraq is not the only place troops are fighting Al Quaida and there were plenty of peace marches prior to and during Afghanistan.
They obviously fell for the propaganda that Saddam was a supporter of Al Quaida.
How are you drawing that conclusion? Is there some accompanying text that I am missing?
As America continues its war of self-defense in Iraq, this tribute by Ayn Rand is worth remembering
The captions in the toon indicate that the "grunts" are marching off to war against AQ.
The text below states
On top of that, the date on the cartoon shows March 23, 2003. Well after the start of Afghanistan.
And on the other-other hand, the lead soldier refers to the Beirut Barracks attacks which most believe was Hezbollah. That means, at least to me, the soldiers are on their way to fight Islamic terrorists in general - not Al Quaida specifically. Unless someone wants to suggest that the Beirut attack was Al Quaida.
So was Saddam a 'terrist?
So was Saddam a 'terrist?
With his links to Al Quaida...
How are you drawing that conclusion? Is there some accompanying text that I am missing?