# "Battle-Hardened" Cartoon -- Offensive?? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 3, 2006, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766 "2006-02-03T01:39:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 1:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/1 "2006-02-03T01:39:12Z")
I made the mistake of watching the first bit of the O’Reilly Factor again today; one of their top stories was a debate over [this](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/photo/postphotos/orb/style/2006-02-02/index.html?imgId=PH2006020200736&imgUrl=/photo/2006/02/02/PH2006020200736.html',650,850))) cartoon was offensive. The ex-general who was arguing that it was offensive was incensed by the cartoon; he compared it to Nazi propoganda. O’Reilly, predictably, seemed to agree with him. Is this cartoon really that bad? Personally, I didn’t find it very offensive at all, and was a bit (naively) a bit surprised at the fuss. Like the opposition guy on the show said, it seemed to me to be coming from a position of sympathy with the soldier – all the criticism was directed at Rumsfeld. If the soldier depicted had been dead, or his wounds more graphically depicted/exploited, it would have been a different matter. Although I lean liberal, I am the son and brother of Army officers, and I’m sympathetic with the troops. The general on the show (who used to actually live across the street from me) accused the cartoonist (and, I imagine, by extension anyone not offended by the cartoon) of not seeing soldiers as human beings – something that’s definitely not true for me, at least. What do you think? Offensive, on the point, or both? Am I way off the mark on this one? ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/2 "2006-02-03T01:51:28Z")
I agree with you, it’s clearly sympathetic towards the soldier. ---
**Author:** ![David\_God\_of\_Frogs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5f9b8f/32.png) [@David\_God\_of\_Frogs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_God_of_Frogs)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/3 "2006-02-03T01:57:59Z")
Just FTR, the Post also published this [letter to the editor](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/01/AR2006020102098.html) today on the cartoon: > [@the Joint Chiefs of Staff](#): > > We were extremely disappointed to see the Jan. 29 editorial cartoon by Tom Toles. > > Using the likeness of a service member who has lost his arms and legs in war as the central theme of a cartoon was beyond tasteless. Editorial cartoons are often designed to exaggerate issues, and The Post is obviously free to address any topic, including the state of readiness of the armed forces. However, The Post and Mr. Toles have done a disservice to readers and to The Post’s reputation by using such a callous depiction of those who volunteered to defend this nation and, as a result, suffered traumatic and life-altering wounds. > > Those who visit wounded veterans in hospitals have found lives profoundly changed by pain and loss. They also have found brave men and women with a sense of purpose and selfless commitment that causes battle-hardened warriors to pause. > > While The Post and some of its readers may not agree with the war or its conduct, these men and women and their families are owed the decency of not having a cartoon make light of their tremendous physical sacrifices. > > As the joint chiefs, we rarely put our hand to one letter, but we cannot let this reprehensible cartoon go unanswered. ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/4 "2006-02-03T02:01:13Z")
Well, I thought it was pretty gross. I agree with you that the satire is really directed at Rumsfeld rather than at the wounded soldier, but jokes about quadruple amputees are never really in good taste, if you ask me. Also, it took me a while to notice that the figure of the soldier is supposed to represent the Army as an entity, instead of an actual wounded soldier. Somehow that seems to make it less repellent, but not all that much. > [@Rodgers01](#): > > The ex-general who was arguing that it was offensive was incensed by the cartoon; he compared it to Nazi propoganda. That, I don’t get. (And after the shitstorm that many people on the right stirred up a year or so ago about a Congressman comparing Abu Ghraib torture practices to the deeds of Nazis, I’m surprised that anybody would be willing to walk into that rhetorical minefield again.) What’s “Nazi-esque” about it? That it criticizes the Secretary of Defense? That it encourages “alarm and despondency” about the state of the troops? That it quips about the patient getting “stretched thin”? I’m not getting it. > [@Rodgers01](#): > > The general on the show (who used to actually live across the street from me) accused the cartoonist (and, I imagine, by extension anyone not offended by the cartoon) of not seeing soldiers as human beings Well, duh—in this case, as I eventually figured out, the “soldier” being depicted in the cartoon **isn’t** supposed to be a human being, he’s just a metaphorical figure for the US Army as a whole. But I wouldn’t necessarily infer from that that the cartoonist doesn’t see **actual** soldiers as human beings. I wonder how this incident will play out in light of the ongoing controversy over the appropriate attitude to take towards offensive cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad? ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/5 "2006-02-03T02:07:12Z")
Well, Toles can draw what he wants, and the Post can print it if they feel like it. I am a firm believer in the First Amendment. I wouldn’t have printed it, though. Using wounded soldiers to score political points isn’t really a class act, in my book. And there are far too many amputees at Walter Reed to play around with this point, even if it was just a metaphor. The Joint Chiefs were absolutely right, and I’m glad they wrote in. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/6 "2006-02-03T02:07:13Z")
Just more of the truth-twisting and rhetorical horseshit that we have come to love from Bill O’Reilly and his pals. Why is anyone surprised at this? ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/7 "2006-02-03T02:12:10Z")
Also, Mr. Moto, I understand where you’re coming from, but screw a class act. I wish instead of a cartoon it was a color photo of a soldier with his arms and legs blown off in battle. People need to see what’s going on, without any embellishment or sugar-coating. I know this war hasn’t been as dangerous as Vietnam or most other wars, but any war will have American soldiers blown up or killed in the prime of their lives. Therefore we ought to only go to war for a good reason, and this “war” does not have a good reason. I, along with many other people, am against it and think it’s a travesty that should be ended. The government’s refusal to do so, to continue to pour money and lives into this disaster, should be publicly criticized in the strongest of terms. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/8 "2006-02-03T02:14:34Z")
The cartoon is clearly a shot at Rumsfeld. It’s deserved too, given the guy’s attitude: > [@](#): > > Sec. Rumsfeld: > Oh, come on. People are fungible. You can have them here or there. The fact of the matter is, we’ve made a judgment and we’ve announced the judgment. [http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040415-secdef0622.html](http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040415-secdef0622.html) The joint chiefs shouldn’t be messing around in politics like this. ---
**Author:** ![Rodgers01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b19c9b/32.png) [@Rodgers01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rodgers01)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/9 "2006-02-03T02:29:13Z")
> [@Argent Towers](#): > > Therefore we ought to only go to war for a good reason, and this “war” does not have a good reason. I, along with many other people, am against it and think it’s a travesty that should be ended. The government’s refusal to do so, to continue to pour money and lives into this disaster, should be publicly criticized in the strongest of terms. I’d prefer if this thread not devolve into a general debate of the right or wrong of the war. There are plenty of other threads talking about that. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Argent\_Towers](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e8c25b/32.png) [@Argent\_Towers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Argent_Towers)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/10 "2006-02-03T02:33:33Z")
I’m sorry. Yes I know this is a cliched topic here. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/11 "2006-02-03T02:34:55Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > The cartoon is clearly a shot at Rumsfeld. > It’s deserved too, given the guy’s attitude: > [U.S. Department of Defense](http://www.defenselink.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040415-secdef0622.html) > > The joint chiefs shouldn’t be messing around in politics like this. I don’t like the word “fungible” when it is applied to living, breathing soldiers. It’s damn insulting. These are people. They are not commodities or grain or raw stock to be used up, exchanged, traded or scrapped. The cartoon as I see it, takes a swipe at Rummy, not the soldiers. It’s showing Rummy as a user who doesn’t give a damn who he destroys. ---
**Author:** ![HPL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/3da27b/32.png) [@HPL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HPL)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/12 "2006-02-03T02:42:31Z")
I support the troops, and am a military brat, but it’s not offensive to me. It did make me a little uncomfortable, but I’m not offended by it and it’s clearly sympathic towards the soldier/the army, while being rather harsh(Deservedly so, IMHO) towards Rumsfeld. Oh, you go to war with the army you have, not the army you’d like. In that case, it’s all better, Mr. Rumsfeld. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/13 "2006-02-03T02:42:50Z")
I think the guys in the military would be better off if the Joint Chiefs would spend more time on things like getting body armor and less time writing whiny letters to the papers. Nobody who reads this is going to think less of the wounded soldier, the target is clearly Rumsfeld and that’s what has the Chiefs’ panties in a twist. They don’t want you to think about the carnage being wrought, they don’t think even we can handle seeing photographs of flag-covered caskets. Don’t humanize the suffering and it can be tolerated better politically. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/14 "2006-02-03T02:46:28Z")
I suppose we could suggest that the Joint Chiefs get a copy of [Johnny Got His Gun](http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0067277/) and view it. That way they could not be offended that it is a cartoon. ---
**Author:** ![Spavined\_Gelding](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/958977/32.png) [@Spavined\_Gelding](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spavined_Gelding)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 2:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/15 "2006-02-03T02:58:15Z")
Within the last week or so a Pentagon commissioned report was, one way or another, made public. That report said that operations in Iraq were stretching the armed forces, not just the Army, and there was some risk that the force would be “broken,” that is unable to effectively perform its mission if some new crises came up – presumably something like the Korean Peninsula going up in smoke or the discovery that Syria or Iran posed a grave and growing threat. When asked about it the Secretary Defense is [reported](http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-01-25-rumsfeld_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA) to have said that he would prefer to think of the forces as ‘battle hardened” rather than stretched dangerously thin. That is the context of Toll’s cartoon. For an editorial cartoon to receive this sort of attention from the big cheeses and the usual suspects on these boards you have to conclude that Mr. Toll drew blood. I’ve been in and seen battle hardened units before. I’m not sure what Mr Rumsfeld thought the phrase means but for 35 years I’ve taken it to mean “worn out and shot to pieces.” There is more than a little “me thinks thou protest too much” in this. ---
**Author:** ![David\_Simmons](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9de053/32.png) [@David\_Simmons](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/David_Simmons)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/16 "2006-02-03T03:05:06Z")
It’s not a pleasant cartoon and wasn’t intended as such. It looks to me like as hard a shot at Rummy as the cartoonist knew how to make. I wasn’t offended by the cartoon. However, I am a little offended by the Joint Chiefs writing to protest in their official capacity. And I’m also somewhat put off by their overreaching in the protest by stating that the “likeness of a service member who has lost his arms and legs” was in the cartoon. There was no such “likeness.” ---
**Author:** ![Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ccd318/32.png) [@Paul\_in\_Qatar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Paul_in_Qatar)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/17 "2006-02-03T03:38:44Z")
It seems to be a fair shot to me. ---
**Author:** ![Frostillicus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9bcb4/32.png) [@Frostillicus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frostillicus)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 4:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/18 "2006-02-03T04:06:04Z")
I hope that the Washington Post politely told the JCS Chairman to shove it up his ass. If he was all that concerned about the well-being of his soldiers, he wouldn’t let them fight in a war without adeqate body armor. The actions of him and his colleagues have caused a lot more anguish for these soldiers than a silly cartoon ever could. PS Who wants to believe that Rummy ordered this guy to make that call? ---
**Author:** ![A.R.Cane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ee7513/32.png) [@A.R.Cane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/A.R.Cane)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 4:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/19 "2006-02-03T04:11:01Z")
I watched Rumsfeld make the statement on TV and was instantly offended. As to the cartoon, BRAVO! ---
**Author:** ![Walter\_Windchill](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/eb8c5e/32.png) [@Walter\_Windchill](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walter_Windchill)\ **Post date:** [February 3, 2006, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766/20 "2006-02-03T04:17:36Z")
I almost never laugh at cartoons and didn’t laugh at this one, but I didn’t find it particularly offensive. It’s a cute quad, you see, and I don’t think he’s either dehumanized or mocked. I like the narrow eyed way he’s looking at the doctor. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/battle-hardened-cartoon-offensive/342766.md?page=2)