P.S.  For the last cartoon, if the context prevented you from getting the point, try replacing the words after "We aren't so naive as to think ..." with anything else you like.

For example:

... that bombing Iraq will end terrorism.

... that one can reach optimum health without taking a good multivitamin supplement (like ours).

... and so on ...

I'll break it down.  The statement "we aren't so naive as to think" sets up a very dangerous presupposition:

"If you disagree with the words following this phrase, you are naive."

Most people simply aren't aware of this process as it's happening.

A "presupposition" is a powerful tool of influence because it is quite effective in shutting down reason.  You have to accept the presupposed statement as true in order for the reading of the sentence to make sense.

Based on some of the emails I received, I think a few may have interpreted the last cartoon as a "liberal attack on the conservatives."  (I am actually not a stalwart follower of either side of the political spectrum of my country.  But again, that's not really the point.  I'm far more interested in helping people become aware of the various mechanisms of control levied on them than in making any political points.) 

For the record, though, there are actually quite a few conservatives who are of the mind that war should always be an extreme last resort.  Indeed, many "paleo-conservatives" in the U.S. don't agree with the approach of the "neo-conservatives" at all.

There are also solutions to conflict available outside of the illusory dilemma of "should we kill them or let them walk all over us."  (Take a balanced survey of history for some helpful suggestions.)  Yes, killing everyone involved will surely put down any popular uprising.  Whether or not that's the only way, or the best way, is surely up for debate.

I sure hope it is, at least.  The alternative is rather grim.