The Antiwar Comic: How Many Times?

Nov07

by Tony DiGerolamo on November 7, 2011 at 12:01 am

└ Tags: antiwar, brain injury, Colonial Army, colonial soldiers, drama, homeless, Iraq War, March, politcs, protests, Revolutionary War, Roberto Cota Briceño, soldiers, The Antiwar Comic, veterans, Veterans Day, vets, Vietnam War, war, Washington, World War I, World War II

MalikTous

November 12, 2011, 9:09 am | #

Fight for your nation, then fight the Battle of Glass Tears. It’s been going on like that for millennia; what nations do with their soldiers when there’s no war is a continuous problem. Disgraceful…
Tony DiGerolamo

November 12, 2011, 1:00 pm | #

Battle of Glass Tears, that would’ve been a good title for a strip.
Ryan

December 21, 2011, 3:45 am | #

In these anti-war comics, are you arguing against our current imperialistic wars?

Or the military itself? If so, while I have aspirations of becoming a military officer, and I think that the armed forces are an honorable profession, I am opposed to the War on Terror and also would call myself a non-interventionist similar to Ron Paul.

But don’t you acknowledge that war is sometimes necessary or inevitable? Such as World War Two, and that it is they just duty of a military force to enforce against corrupt people?
- Tony DiGerolamo
  
  December 21, 2011, 4:12 am | #
  
  Good question. While I am not a pacifist, I believe the only “just” war (if there is such a thing) would be a defensive one. World War 2 is, on some level, justified by the attack on Pearl Harbor. However, if you read the history leading up to the war and that of WW1, it was inevitable. Roosevelt wanted to get involved and his sanctions against the Japanese was definitely not what you would call non-interventionist. As for Hitler, he attacked Stalin before the United States entered the war. If the US had somehow stayed out of it, one could argue that Hitler and Stalin would’ve destroyed each other on their own. Although that would’ve been cold comfort to Hilter’s victims, it might’ve prevented the 30 million deaths under Stalin and the 50 million deaths under Mao and the entire Cold War.
  
  As I see, war in the modern age has become a series of reactions base on prior experiences, whereas, most people (especially in the US) fail to put events in historical context. This was most evidence during the Bush lead up to the Iraq War. Unable or unwilling to understand the politics of the Middle East, the Bushies charged forth with their Neocons in an arrogant attempt to remake the world. It can’t be done with bombs.
  
  The problem with being the military is that you are no longer master of your own fate. You are part of a larger organization and each part must obey orders for the organization to function. In our current state, those orders are terribly contradictory because of the current and previous leaders and the bloated state of the national defense.
  
  The reality is, the only weapons you really need to defend the country are submarine nukes and satellites. Things like battleships, jets, bombers, etc. These are all pretty useless in an all out war. And, as a Japanese General said about the United States, you could never invade it because there would be “a gun behind every blade of grass”. Can you imagine the Chinese landing in southern California? The Crips and Bloods alone would decimate their infantry, not to mention the highly militarized LAPD.
  
  Whether or not being a military officer is honorable depends on the individual. Are you willing to risk your entire career and your life, not only to defend your country, but to defend your principles? When push comes to shove, will you shoot up a car of civilians at a check point? Will you order a raid on some poor bastard’s hut even when you know he’s not a terrorist? Will you risk your career and your life reporting a superior’s crimes in the field? Can you be a Bradley Manning or a Dan Choi? You take an oath to protect the Constitution, but when everyone in your unit decides not to, can you be the one guy to mail in the pictures of Abu Gharaib?
  - Ryan
    
    December 22, 2011, 3:27 am | #
    
    I think that the Founders were right when they believed that standing armies are a threat to a republic, as it’s enforcement would be contradictory to liberal, democratic values as you described above. This is supported by the military-industrial complex which derives profit from war.
    
    However, you are debating the question of the honorability of being a military officer on our current authoritarian situation. Overall, I think that fighting and dying to preserve liberty and freedom is a worthy crusade, more so than the perpetual warfare for the military-industrial complex that our current foreign policy is based on.
    - Tony DiGerolamo
      
      December 22, 2011, 6:22 pm | #
      
      But how can you fight and die to preserve liberty and freedom if the government is guided by the military-industrial complex? Seems to me there is a conflict until that is resolved.

Comments are closed.

The Webcomic Factory

Affiliates

Friends of the Factory

Keep the Factory Running!

The Antiwar Comic: How Many Times?

Link Buddies

Finished Webcomics

Share this:

Affiliates

Friends of the Factory

Keep the Factory Running!

The Antiwar Comic: How Many Times?

Share this:

Related Comics ¬

Link Buddies

Finished Webcomics