Skip to content

How We Go To War

Tom Tomorrow
© Tom Tomorrow

Seven simple steps! And you knew someone was going to bring up Hitler, didn’t you?

We have gotten so good at justifying new wars. I just wish we were as good at ending them.

Also, I can’t seem to get rid of this nagging feeling that we are being suckered into this war.



  1. PatriotSGT wrote:

    Here’s likely outcomes for this mess based on the comic.

    Will bomb our way to victory. Of curse anybody who has studied the art of war knows that unless we drop nuclear bombs this strategy will not work.

    No “combat boots” on the ground. If we want to achieve the goal of dismantling ISIS there WILL have to be combat boots on the ground, unless we invoke the option above.

    The strategy to just bomb them is of course just a delay tactic until after the elections. Hoping they can drag out the mission accomplished banner in time for those same elections is a last ditch farce.

    Are be being baited into this, yep. Why else would a group like them call out the biggest kid on the block? They want this fight, they see Al Qaida’s goal of bankrupting us fell short, but feel they can finish the job. This group and others like it do, in fact, want the entire world under their version of Islamic law. They want 100% of all people to submit to their ideology. They actually believe, however inconceivable, that they can win.

    So the question is, like the Nazi threat, do we fight them now and actually finish it with less cost and loss of life, or do we wait and fight a larger more lethal enemy down the road. Do we wait for WWIII and 50 million dead (WWII was around 20 million dead), or do this now. Since the hypothesis is not proven or so clear that’s a tough decision for any leader.

    I think Obama is choosing correctly, but I think he already knows that boots on the ground will be needed and he wants to ease into it. That’s just my opinion.

    Sunday, September 28, 2014 at 9:54 am | Permalink
  2. Hassan wrote:

    As a sunni muslim, I must wonder why there was no action against Bashar-Al-Asad after he has killed 200k civilians (official number), while ISIS after killing few 100s (any number is not good though) is being treated as something that must be taken care of by America. Does US government think that sunni population will love USA more now?

    Sunday, September 28, 2014 at 2:19 pm | Permalink
  3. TJ wrote:

    STAY OUT OF IT!!! For 40+ years now the US has been intervening in the affairs of the Middle East with escalating disastrous effects. Let them sort our their own issues for a change. People in the Middle East don’t “hate our freedom”; they hate us because we keep bombing them and intervening in matters that don’t concern us. ISIS is a terrible organization, but the best way to combat groups like ISIS is to STOP GIVING THEM REASONS TO EXIST. Every “justification” I’ve seen from them is that they are committing a heinous act in response to something the US is doing, like bombing, to people in the Middle East. If we stop doing that, for many many years, then maybe the Middle East will stop hating the US so much.

    Sunday, September 28, 2014 at 10:42 pm | Permalink
  4. PatriotSGT wrote:

    Hassan, I believe the reason is that Bashar did not pose any threat to the US. He was always kept in check by our presence and Israel. How he treated his own people, was certainly a humanitarian issue, but no real threat to the USA. Isis meanwhile, is not currently a threat, but differently to Bashar, they openly threaten the US and promise to bring the war to our homeland, and indeed have stepped up recruiting to find some way to strike at us.
    So I don’t think it has anything to do with us not liking Sunni’s, it’s more on if we think they are a threat to us. We (and the world) have a history of ignoring humanitarian problems because we don’t want to get involved, like Cambodia in the 70’s, or Rwanda and many other similar conflicts.

    Monday, September 29, 2014 at 5:38 am | Permalink
  5. Hassan wrote:

    PATRIOTSGT, your points are valid from point of view american public, there is support in attacking ISIS because we feel threatened.

    But there have been numerous articles published that shows the threat is exaggerated. Moreover it seems the extremists have formula of saying things to drag american army (and equipment) into their areas so they can get stronger in weapons and numbers. In fact it seems each decade the extremists are getting more extreme. So one must stop and wonder what to do make sure we reverse the trend.

    Monday, September 29, 2014 at 6:49 am | Permalink
  6. PatriotSGT wrote:

    I wish I knew how to solve this problem.
    I hate to say it, but I think until the Arab and Muslim countries address this threat it will continue. Perhaps when their rule is threatened they will act. It seems to me that they, at least up to this point, have had an uneasy truce with these type elements. Kind of a don’t bother us and we won’t bother you attitude.
    I think many readers here would concur that we should not be the ones to “fix” this problem, but instead believe the Muslim community should address it. Its just that they have previously chosen to not intervene.

    Monday, September 29, 2014 at 7:58 am | Permalink
  7. Iron Knee wrote:

    I agree very much with this discussion. But I do want to point out one small silver lining, which is that several other Middle Eastern states (including some ruled by Sunnis) are participating in the fight against ISIS.

    I just wish they could do it without us. As TJ points out, we have screwed up royally in the Middle East to the point where even if we somehow manage to execute a police action to solve a humanitarian crisis (and do it right), extremists will still be able to use it against us.

    Monday, September 29, 2014 at 9:42 am | Permalink