Posted on 07/12/2004 7:39:19 AM PDT by Tennessean4Bush
This is Barone at his best. Sorry if this is already been posted. Did a couple of searches and did not find it.
Yet they keep on trotting out the same old canard...
and people keep falling for it.
Kerry would never call what he wants to do appeasement. Chamberlain probably never called his agreement with Hitler "appeasement" either. Of course, in Chamberlain's case history made the judgement. It is left to the American people to decide whether in Kerry's case his idea amounts to appeasement.
He leaves out isolationism.
Don't let any foreigners in. Guard your borders with a strong military. Let people living in foreign countries defend themselves and solve their own problems.
I don't think it's feasible nowadays, since we want to meddle in everyone's business and tell everyone how they ought to live, but it's the way things used to be.
So, is that the approach America should have taken in 1941?
Or, should we merely have attacked Japan and left Europe to fight Hitler?
I am sure that pResident kerry will call for a group hug to make everything OK.
Bump for morning break.
Flash traffic--cubicle bound--Analysis of President's speech appreciated--confidence is high--repeat--confidence is high
Sometimes I wonder about that.
By rescuing Europe from Hitler, and then guarding them from Soviet aggression for forty years, we seem to have created a continent of spoiled socialists who rely on us for defense while criticizing everything we do.
Hitler made a similar mistake, declaring war on the US when we declared war on Japan. He could have told the Japanese too bad, I've got enough problems, but he honored his treaty with them. You can see where it got him.
If we had only fought the Japanese, the Soviets probably would have beaten Hitler and swept right through Europe. Then Stalin, and not us, would have been stuck with them.
I am not necessarily advocating any of this, but it could have happened that way, and now we'd be facing a different set of problems.
"I don't think it's feasible nowadays, since we want to meddle in everyone's business and tell everyone how they ought to live, but it's the way things used to be."
WE'RE telling everybody how to live???? Come on! Sadaam wasn't, Osama isn't, the terrorist aren't, no dictator is telling everyone how to live. Just us. That's very interesting. How come they have the right to do that, and we don't? Dictatorship is better than democracy? I'd rather have us (the U.S) telling the world how to live than the Islamic extremists. What about you? What would YOU have??
IN FACT, the UN (United Nations) should be set up so that they would not allow ANY country to be a dictatorship EVER AGAIN. What's wrong with that???
I am most tired of this dance that makes it seem that Democrats and other socialist are of just a different opinion about how to defeat terrorist. It is the greatest lie of this era.
Democrats and other socialist don't want to defeat terrorist. They want to enable them - to make sure they have more terrorism foisted upon the good people of earth. Terrorism aids and helps the socialist agenda. It is time this lie is brought into the light.
Since this lie remains in the dark, it must be assumed there is something dark about the goals of the democrats and other socialist. If their dream for the rest of us is so grand, why must it be achieved by such means? We should be rushing to embrace their ideas - ideas who's true goal should not be hidden - but paraded out and trumped to the masses. But instead we have a pyre of lies and pretend it's just a difference of opinion. I'm sick of it.
The democrats and their ungodly alliance with whatever-forces that will defeat the United States of America and bring the downfall of anything and everything that destroys the USA is the truth. They love TERRORISM. The democrats wish they had invented it.
This article is a bit too black and white.
If u look at the anti partisan operations carried out by the Germans where they used all the ruthless methods known to man they just helped to recruit more partisans.
The soviets carried out anti Insurgency ops throughout the 50s, 60s and 70s, 80s well into the 21st century against various ethnic groups who resented Russian. Soviet Dominance, partly the reason the Soviet Union collapsed. If you use purely military tactics to defeat an Insurgency you will defeat that rising or group but then you will be fighting the same war again in the next 10 20 30 years. If the local populace do have legitimate grievances as was the situation in North Ireland dealing with those grievances is not appeasement. Tony
Absolutely brilliant article.
The islamists declared war on us, over and over.
The Democrats are sending us an Anti-War peace activist during a time of war. Socialists, Communists, folks in France and the Terrorists are thrilled. Perhaps we should send the democrats a message this November.
Here here! I cannot believe pundits actually take the Kerry-Edwards ticket seriously. It's a joke and dangerous in a time of war.
Hate to break the news to the author, but appeasing is also just what Bush has been doing with regard to the terrorists in Israel. The most recent example is his refusal to go along with moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem, Israel's chosen capital. And many people on this board have been defending him for it, precisely because it would "inflame" the terrorists against us.
Totally agree. The left is the enemy, not just another opinion. The media dogs and edoocaters have such a grip on the ignorant and the young, it's positively scary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.