The wind of change

[woopflying.livejournal.com]

Comments

[goumindong.livejournal.com]

fantastic

[darkblood777.livejournal.com]

Nuclear war would be so much more fun if it was like this.

[geologybabe.livejournal.com]

This is the funniest cartoon I have seen in a while...and it is absolutely brilliant.

[mid-limbo.livejournal.com]

jesus christ, this has got to be the trippiest political cartoon i have EVER seen.

bush and lsd don't mix.

[crazy-mittens.livejournal.com]

what animal is bush supposed to be an armidillo?

[geckoman.livejournal.com]

If you like this, you should subscribe to the guardiantoons community and get the political cartoons from the Guardian UK every day...they have got to be the most outrageous stuff I've ever seen...too bad I'm not really up on my British politics...oh, GWB is a monkey/ape of some sort.

[woopflying.livejournal.com]

Steve Bell always portrays Bush as a monkey.
Now why is that?
I guess he looks that way from across the pond?

Check other Guardian cartoonists on www.guardian.co.uk

[deni-zen.livejournal.com]

maybe it's the "600/800 pound gorilla" concept?

http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/18/messages/890.html
"
: Q. Where does an eight hundred pound gorilla sleep?
: A. Wherever it wishes!

: The 800 pound gorilla is the biggest, toughest and meanest in the jungle and consequently can do whatever it wishes whenever it wishes."

[tea-and-vinyl.livejournal.com]

Aw, thanks for this. I never have the chance to look at the cartoons on a daily basis.

[uberreiniger.livejournal.com]

This can only have been made by a British artist.

[kmilligan.livejournal.com]

Why is everyone on the left so approving of irrational dictatorships having access to nuclear weapons? Do you want muderers and rapists having easy access to guns too?

Maybe I'm completely nuts, but I don't really want to go through another cold war.

[kingyummy.livejournal.com]

Why is everyone on the right so blind to the fact that the reason other nations want nuclear weapons is because the US - the most violent nation in the world at the moment, and the one that is ever-ready to start conflicts - has them?
It's very simple: it's self-defence.

Personally I think that any nation that has nuclear weapons has a fucking cheek to even suggest that other nations shouldn't do likewise.

[kmilligan.livejournal.com]

So if we give up ours the nice mullahs and Kim Jong-Il, the Chinese and the Russians will give up theirs eh? No chance that they might decide to use them as cover to, say, take back Taiwan, reclaim the Russian empire or unite the country under Dear Leader once and for all?

We're not the bad guys, no matter how much the left wishes it were so.

[oddityangel.livejournal.com]

I'm trying to understand how you inferred the opinions of a group of people, who often prescribe to varying opinions within said group, from a cartoon with a bunch people farting towards the sky. It doesn't seem to be saying anything other than 'Nations with nuclear weapons often engage in provocative acts like farting in the air (and despite their condemnation of N.Korea America seems to be quite good at it), so at least N. Korea is in good company'

[kip-w.livejournal.com]

Show me where "everyone on the left" is "approving" of NK having nukes. I'm just not seeing it. Clinton successfully kept them from it; Bush dropped the ball (or dropped the dog or choked on the pretzel or fell off the two-wheeled conveyance or whatever) in this area as in so many others.

[kmilligan.livejournal.com]

I don't consider Bill Clinton to be a man of the left really. If I speak of more mainstream people I tend to use "progressive", or sometimes "liberal". I use the term left, perhaps not entirely correctly to apply to a strain of political thought pretty far outside of the mainstream.

The North Koreans successfully pulled the wool over our eyes and continued a clandestine program of uranium enrichment . It was in 1998 that they launched a missile over Japan, three years before Bush even took office. It's not like Bush got into office and they magically started work on a nuclear program, the program has been ongoing since the early 90s.

I don't blame Clinton for North Korea's nuclear program, there's only two people to blame for that; Kim Jong-Il and Kim Il-Sung. I'll even go so far as to credit Clinton with slowing down the progress of Kim's program by bringing it to international attention and applying scrutiny too it, but I think Kim managed to hoodwink the Clinton administration for the most part, and it wasn't until we developed concrete intelligence about their uranium capability that the North Koreans finally decided to give up the secret.

I don't think it's entirely productive to figure out who's fault it is. One can blame Bush Sr., Clinton, Congress, Bush Jr, etc... but North Korea is getting close to having nuclear weapons. Their last test was a dud for the most part, but the next time they might get lucky. We have to figure out what to do about that.

[marksism.livejournal.com]

Hm, not to disagree with you, but your analogy is a little off if I'm interpreting it right. Most right wingers who would oppose the proliferation of nukes to dictators (which, honestly, is a really good idea) would support the easy access of guns by murderers and rapists, if by extension this meant greater access and freedom for law-abiding citizens who could arm themselves in defense.

Personally I am pro-gun, anti-Iran-and-Mr-Ronery-getting-nukes but still mostly liberal.

[kmilligan.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it's not a good analogy. I can't think of a better one though. But it's only bad in the sense that the opposite schism can be found on the right. I've certainly heard my share of "felons have a right of self-defense too" coming from people on the right. I'd prefer violent people not have guns, but I don't really think most laws aimed at the gun do much in that regard.

I prefer locking up dangerous, unstable people, including dictators :) But for the dictators, that can be difficult.

[-hiddenwolf-.livejournal.com]

Why is everyone on the left so approving of irrational dictatorships having access to nuclear weapons?

Wait, what?

[kmilligan.livejournal.com]

Per my later discussion with kip_w, substitute "everyone" with "some".

[vlion.livejournal.com]

What a *moron*.

The problem is that NK is uncontrollable and does not deal normally with the rest of the world.

[darkblood777.livejournal.com]

Funny. The same thing could be said about the United States.

Darkblood
*[insert Darth Vader score]*
-2k6

[supermouse.livejournal.com]

My goodness. You mean it might, say, invade another country unilaterally in an unjust war, destroying their infrastructure, torturing their citizens and bringing civil war through mismanagement and featherbedding?

No, we certainly don't want a country like that to have nukes.

George Bush is a fucking terrorist.

[vlion.livejournal.com]

Unjust? I'd hardly call the Iraq war unjust. And, if you hadn't noticed, effective war involves destroying the infrastructure. Read more history.

And, whether you like it or not- and I don't- torture happens. and in a good society it gets dealt with. As it has gotten dealt with.

And the civil war was brought about by warring sections of Islam- not too far off from what happened with Yugoslavia. If you remember or know your history, you'd understand.


In short, your comment is irrelevant due to a lack of understanding history and human nature.