|
|
Post by Jaga on May 15, 2008 18:43:24 GMT -7
I did not know that he was talking about Poland being invaded by Germany...
the appeasement was not about Poland but about Czechoslovakia by the way, at least in Europe (but Bush talked about some Am. senators).
I did not like the comparison, since it was Israel that invaded Palestine, not the other way around.
here is the video:
here is what president Bush said:
"Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along," the President said. "We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is - the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on May 15, 2008 21:03:53 GMT -7
|
|
|
|
Post by kaima on May 16, 2008 0:32:59 GMT -7
Jaga,
Here is another opinion to be reckoned with. :
I do know this: Liberal talk radio is a lousy business proposition.
And there are good reasons for that.
No. 1 -- Liberals have minds of their own. Unlike Rush Limbaugh's dittoheads, they don't respond like Pavlov's dogs when the master rings their emotional bells.
Liberals operate higher up the brain stem than most talk radio listeners. Liberals use their heads; conservatives go for the gut. (The term "liberal" in liberal arts education doesn't mean getting politically indoctrinated; it means thinking for yourself.)
Second, liberals have real jobs during the day. Jobs that require using their brains. They aren't sitting around in T-shirts and boxer shorts all afternoon, beer in hand, yelling from the Barcalounger, "You tell 'em, Rush!" Liberals aren't stickin' it to the man by goofing off at their dead-end jobs and listening to rants on the radio while munching fatty snacks jimmied out of the company vending machine.
Most commercial talk radio listeners are looking for entertainment, not enlightenment. They enjoy a rhetorical circus. They don't care if facts get in the way of a good argument.
Liberals have a reality-based view of the world. And let's face it -- reality is soooo B-O-R-I-N-G.
Liberal talk radio is a great sedative. If I'm having trouble getting to sleep at night, I can slap on the headphones, cue up a podcast of NPR's "Talk of the Nation," and I'm off to dreamland in no time.
The popularity of right-wing talk radio would be irrelevant, just a quirk of the American communications market, if it weren't for the political implications. Dittoheads can be stampeded into mass action that frightens politicians who might otherwise do the right thing.
For this sad fact of American life, I blame the educational system. Students these days just don't learn to think for themselves.
The biggest sign of trouble in American education is not low test scores. It's not abysmal graduation rates. It's the continuing commercial success of right-wing talk radio.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimpres on May 16, 2008 9:09:25 GMT -7
So is appeasement the way with Iran? Is that what the liberals will try and accomplish?
Did not work for Hitler, Stalin, not sure about Musallini (sp),
|
|
|
|
Post by kaima on May 16, 2008 10:08:53 GMT -7
So is appeasement the way with Iran? Is that what the liberals will try and accomplish? Did not work for Hitler, Stalin, not sure about Musallini (sp), You are right, Jim. We should nuke them now and let Allah sort them out. But we better hurry and nuke them while Bush is in office. These wimps McCain & the others know nothing about a real war! Kai |
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on May 16, 2008 12:55:49 GMT -7
So is appeasement the way with Iran? Is that what the liberals will try and accomplish? Did not work for Hitler, Stalin, not sure about Musallini (sp), Jim, did Iran attacked or invaded any country I do not know about? Please share with us these news. I think there is this speculation that IF Iran attack Israel that it would be lavelled with ground..... so maybe we should bomb Iran BEFORE it is ready to attack (even if it would never be ready to attack). How wonderful, just bomb, bomb, bomb Iran, then Syria, then Palestine... then Israel will live in peace.... between ruins and dead corpses of others thanks to the brotherly help from US and then democracy will flourish. |
|
|
|
Post by jimpres on May 16, 2008 14:09:23 GMT -7
Iran did attack Iraq and had a war with them for a number of years.
I don't know what the Persians did and don't care.
We waited as Hitler did Chrystal Nacht. Should we have done something?
How do we insure the world Iran won't attack another country? WE meaning the World body of nations.
I will tell you this threaten me and I will prepare.
Attack me and I will fight.
Over
|
|
|
|
Post by kaima on May 16, 2008 14:46:09 GMT -7
Iran did attack Iraq and had a war with them for a number of years. I don't know what the Persians did and don't care. We waited as Hitler did Chrystal Nacht. Should we have done something? How do we insure the world Iran won't attack another country? WE meaning the World body of nations. I will tell you this threaten me and I will prepare. Attack me and I will fight. Over Yup, a good Christian preemptive strike as taught by Jesus. Was your grandpa one of the Japanese who helped plan the attack on Pearl Harbor? That was a real effective preemptive strike. It took us a few years to recover from that one in the US! Kai |
|
|
|
Post by jimpres on May 16, 2008 15:53:35 GMT -7
Kai,
I did not mention a preemptive strike if you read each word. I said I would prepare.
If you stike/attack then the battle is on.
If it's nuclear no one wins.
And what group of people rather die and go to heaven then live?
I will disregard your attack on my nationality.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaima on May 16, 2008 17:46:04 GMT -7
Jim, you did mention <<<We waited as Hitler did Chrystal Nacht. Should we have done something?>>> and Crystal Nacht was an internal German item, long before invasions of other countries. Jeez, if we used that as a basis for moving into other countries we would be in 25% of the third world countries trying to straighten things up! For the record, I fully agree we should be prepared. I believe we are prepared for anything on earth, only we have exhausted our army so our options are severely limited. Where did you see an attack on nationality? Polish, American or Japanese? Pearl Harbor was the ultimate preemptive strike unless you want to call the second Iraqi War preemptive. I must have misread your words as implying a preemptive strike on Iran. As you say <<what group of people rather die and go to heaven then live?>> We lived with MAD Mutually Assured Destruction for some 40 years with the Soviet Union. I figure we can do the same with Iran. Besides, they are far away from having a delivery system that can reach us. Let the EU and Israel worry about the shorter range rockets, that is not our problem. I also agree on <<Attack me and I will fight.>> but why worry about 15 years down the road? All we have to do is prepare for 15 years down the road. Kai |
|
|
|
Post by jimpres on May 16, 2008 18:18:15 GMT -7
My history remembering is not that good so maybe Krystal Nacht was not a good example.
But any preemptive strike must be dealt with.
I don't see a good analogy of the Soviet Union and the Muslim Brotherhood, i.e. Iran, Libia etc.
And the delivery system only has to reach Israel or a NATO country and we will be dragged into it.
15 years down the road I will be pushing up daisies.
|
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on May 16, 2008 19:47:02 GMT -7
Iran did attack Iraq and had a war with them for a number of years. Jim, no, this is not true. IRAQ ATTACKED IRAN FIRST. see the Wikipedia: The war began when Iraq invaded Iran on 22 September 1980 following a long history of border disputes and fears of Shia insurgency among Iraq's long suppressed Shia majority influenced by Iran's Islamic revolution. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Iraq_Waryou may think that Iran attacked Iraq because... America was in that time supporting Saddam and Rumsfeld was shaking hands with Saddam but the truth is different. So, America was supprting the attacking country - does not sound real? But it is true. +++++++++++++++++++++++ There is no reason to start the third war, there is no justification for it. Jim, do you know that 60% of graduate students in Iran are women? Do you know that in Saudi Arabia women cannot even drive a car? So, why not to go to Sudan (where is a genocide taking place now) or to Saudi Arabia (where the 9-11 terrorists came from and women have no rights)? |
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on May 16, 2008 20:31:59 GMT -7
Jaga, Here is another opinion to be reckoned with. : I do know this: Liberal talk radio is a lousy business proposition. And there are good reasons for that. No. 1 -- Liberals have minds of their own. Unlike Rush Limbaugh's dittoheads, they don't respond like Pavlov's dogs when the master rings their emotional bells. Liberals operate higher up the brain stem than most talk radio listeners. Liberals use their heads; conservatives go for the gut. (The term "liberal" in liberal arts education doesn't mean getting politically indoctrinated; it means thinking for yourself.) Kai, I loved your opinion about liberals  |
|
|
|
Post by Jaga on May 16, 2008 22:05:02 GMT -7
Europeans about Bush's Obama comment:
The Guardian voices its outrage most prominently, calling Bush a “President without Shame”:
It is outrageous for an American president to use the term “appeasement” in describing the policy of an opponent when speaking before the parliament of a foreign nation. Democrats have rightly reacted with deep anger to this affront. It seems that when it comes to American traditions, George Bush is content to play Samson and topple the pillars of the temple in order to smash precedents he dislikes. What he forgets is that Samson not only killed his enemy, the Philistines, but himself as well.
Bush’s interminable and self-destructive presidency will continue to be so till the bitter end. And if he can topple the campaign of his political enemy, he’s prepared to bring the walls down on himself as well. So ends one of the most shameful of American presidencies.
----------------------------------------------
Even The Times is nothing if not vitriolic commenting:
I can’t help but think that all this might be proof of something Newt Gingrich suggested a couple of weeks ago. if Republicans think they can win this election by attacking Obama on the usual grounds that he’s a weak-kneed friend of terrorists and appeasers, they are sorely wrong. The Republicans’ own record on national security is now so badly damaged that for them to claim that the Democrats can’t be trusted sounds to most ears like that old definition of chutzpah - the child who murders both his parents and then claims the law’s protection because he’s an orphan.
|
|
|
|
Post by kaima on May 16, 2008 22:51:40 GMT -7
so maybe Krystal Nacht was not a good example. One of the reasons Krastal Nacht was not repeated is because the Jews were German citizens and evidently well insured. The German insurance industry took a tremendous loss from the Kristal Nacht vandalism. I can't say America was outraged by the event too much, but then I don't know. Certainly long after that night and after additional persecution within Germany, America firmly refused to open its doors to fleeing Jewish Germans. One example is a fleeing ship with about 600 or so that reached Cuba and was refused entry to the US. Another was a failed proposal to accept a lot of Jewish asylants for settlement in Alaska. Kai |
|
