Posted on 10/19/2015 4:21:52 PM PDT by Kaslin
I have nothing to offer you, except blood, sweat, and arugula.
Winston Churchill, well before he became prime minister in May 1940, was busy all through 1939 prompting the British government to prepare for war — and then, as first lord of the Admiralty, helping to direct it once it broke out. But what if Churchill had been Barack Obama? What would Britain’s foremost opponent of appeasement have been like?
The Munich Agreement
Obama-Churchill might have said something like the following in regards to the 1938 Munich Agreement.
“We live in a complex world and at a challenging time. And none of these challenges lend themselves to quick or easy solutions, but all of them require British leadership. If we stay patient and determined, then we will, in fact, meet these challenges. The Munich Agreement is a comprehensive government agreement. It is the first that actually constrains Nazi Germany from further aggression, and one whose provisions are transparent and enforceable. It is a sober and judicious way to preclude war and to bring Germany back into the family of nations and to become a credible regional power, while allowing the German people to express their legitimate aspirations.”
“Obviously, the last twenty years of ostracizing Germany has not worked. So it’s time for some creative reset diplomacy, and a reengagement to get out of the rut of the last two decades. I don’t believe, as did former British officials, in snubbing supposed enemies, but rather in engaging and talking with them. Lots of you in the American newspaper business keep expecting us, like some American baseball team, to hit home runs. Well, we’re perfectly happy to hit singles and doubles like this agreement.”
“Finally, the relationship between Germany and Western Europe includes centuries of co-existence and cooperation, but also a long history of conflict and religious wars. More recently, tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Germans, and a shaky peace in which German-speaking majorities were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations. Moreover, the sweeping change brought by modernity led many Germans to view the West as hostile to the traditions of German culture. Violent extremists have exploited these tensions in a small but potent minority of Germans. The attacks of 1939 and the continued efforts of these extremists to engage in violence against civilians have led some in my country to view Germany as inevitably hostile not only to Britain and Western countries, but also to human rights. This has bred more fear and mistrust. So long as our relationship is defined by our differences, we will empower those who sow hatred rather than peace, and who promote conflict rather than the cooperation that can help all of our people achieve justice and prosperity. This cycle of suspicion and discord must end.”
“How can we in good conscience justify war before we’ve tested a diplomatic agreement that achieves our objectives?”
Ping
Didn’t we have an Obama back then? I think he went under the name Neville Chamberlain.
Please do not slime the Churchill name by even mentioning the Dorkbama the Muslim bottom-dwelling scum-sucking lying grifting POS in the same sentence.
D*mn, I just did.
I’ll go to my room now.
[ Didn’t we have an Obama back then? I think he went under the name Neville Chamberlain. ]
Chamberlain did in his own way love his country....
Barry really doesn’t like the country he is ruling at all....
We would all be speaking German and naming our boys Adolf.
No, there was no 0bama back then. Chamberlain and the 0ther 0ne share the fact that their strategic moves were woefully wrong. But recall that Chamberlain's were unintentionally so.
1) Chamberlain, though in error, loved the country he led, and was working in what he hoped were its best interests; 2) He was also legally a citizen (subject) of country he led.
The third divergence has yet to be tested by reality, but I'm unfortunately pretty sure how it will turn out: 3) Chamberlain immediately volunteered to help promote Churchill's program for organizing the defense of the homeland.
No that was actually John-who-was-in-Vietnam-Kerry
More like Baraq Hussein Chamberlein.
Our Churchill is none other than Ted Cruz
To Chamberlain’s credit, he did not double down on his
original mistake in the face of Hitler’s aggression.
As Hussein would have done, without a doubt. - The
political winds are blowing in the direction of the
Muslim hordes; and you know Hussein; WHICH EVER WAY
THE WIND BLOWS!! All the while, seeing no evil,
hearing no evil, and speaking no evil.
Insulting headline of the day award
What you said!
Eventually he honored his country's committment. But even after Hitler attacked Poland, Chamberlain thought he could deal with Hitler.
What really galled Chamberlain was that he intensely disliked Churchill, and EVERY ONE!!! of Churchill's predictions about what Hitler would do came true. Even so, when Chamberlain died later in 1940, Churchill said nice things about him.
Churchill was so eloquent and had such a command of the language that he could call you a stupid SOB and have you believing he was wishing you happy birthday. He was a master.
Peace through strength is the only safe answer. Some interpret that as peace through threats and suspicion. There is a time for threats and a time for suspicion. it is not always and everywhere. Wisdom must play a part. The ability to recognize reality must play a part. Liberals notoriously deny reality for feelings. That is why they are incapable of sound foreign policy. The threat with SOME foreign policy conservatives is that they pick fights and raise enemies. Liberals also raise enemies through foolishness. I guess if you must pick an error, err on the side of safety. Liberals covet the money spent on defense for their own lunatic projects. For example they would divert defense spending for spending on global warming. Or for social disasters the government can spend into the ground while producing terrible results.
If your choice is between the two above errors better to go with the one that supports a strong military.
Still, there is fault in some war mongers who seem to love war and thrive and making everyone an enemy. With the death of a Judeo-Christian foundation has come the death of wisdom and discernment. Character matters nowhere. The values of today are feelings, wealth, imagination, and self centeredness.
My favorite Churchill quote (at least the funniest) was:
“Sir, you are drunk.” He replied:
And you, Bessie, are ugly. But I shall be sober in the morning, and you will still be ugly.
More like Oswald Mosley.
I just finished William Manchester’s epic three volume bio of Churchill, “The Last Lion.” Well worth the reading. Churchill’s speeches in Parliament were eagerly awaited by members of all parties. He combined wit and sarcasm so well that one Brit writer thought him Britain’s best comedian.
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.