![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Wdtabor" wrote in message
... In article , "Dan Luke" writes: This election will encourage the terrorists like nothing else has. Unfortunately, the spin in the Muslim world will be that Al Qaeda frightened the Spanish people into replacing their government. Score one for the bad guys. -- And Italy, Britain and Australia will no doubt pay a heavy price for the cowardice of the Spanish. Churchill, speaking of appeasement, said it was 'feeding the crocodile in hopes it would eat you last.' Although this is dangerously close to invoking Godwin's Law: It's particularly sickening to hear the American right (WD, I'm not addressing you personally yet) pompously adopting the mantle of Churchill. It's your political forbears who were the master appeasers, right up to Pearl Harbor and (as far as Europe is concerned) beyond. It took well over two years before you committed troops despite the begging from your cloest allies. And the mid-century American right wing positively adored Mussolini. So, from a European perspective, pious crap about appeasement doesn't sit well coming from the US - let's admit it; the jaw/war choice is sensitive to specific points in time, to each side's attempt at self-justification, and can only be judged later from a historical perspective. Now, by "right" I meant the traditional middle-American conservative. WD, what would the Libertarian viewpoint have been between Munich and Pearl Harbor? What about after PH? -- David Brooks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|