WinstonSmith1984: "There is a big difference though in that Neville was faced with aggression that he did not inspire(The idiots running US foreign policy did inspire aggression)... "
You may not realize it, but there is an actual school of historical analysis which claims that Hitler was the product of British intelligence and financial interests, including Amerians.
They say the Brits supported Hitler's rise to power and encouraged his megalomaniacal dreams of conquest.
And their purpose -- so the theory goes -- was to humble and destroy Germany as just punishment for Germany starting the First World War.
Guido Giacomo Preparata is the author of a very detailed (and dense) book explaining our financial support for destroying Wiemar and raising up Hitler instead.
My opinion is, that's all a bunch of hooey, but it does prove that serious people can make a serious case that Hitler was just a puppet on strings pulled by British & American financial interests.
So, the coorelation of Chamberlain/Hitler with today's weak leaders/Putin remains strong.
WinstonSmith1984: "As the leader of the British Empire he thought he could surrender territories that were not his to give("
- In 1936 the Rhineland was protected from German military occupation by the Versailles treaty and French military occupation.
When the French did nothing to oppose Hitler's reoccupation, Hitler realized he had pretty much a free hand in eastern Europe.
Chechnya in 1999 was part of Russia, protected by no treaties and defended by no one against Russian brutality.
Putin realized that he had a free hand there. - Like Ukraine today, in 1938 neither Austria nor Czechoslovakia were protected by treaty, and yet Chamberlain realized that every new conquest made Hitler more powerful relative to the west, and so the debate then, as now, was: should we oppose Hitler, and stop him now, while he is still relatively weak, or must we wait until he has grown so powerful we may no longer be able to stop him?
- So in Austria, 1938, the French & Brits totally looked the other way, just as we did when Putin invaded Georgia.
- But by the time of Czechoslovakia and Munich 1938, even Chamberlain realized the time was quickly coming when the Allies must stand up against Hitler.
But in 1938 Chamberlain did not think the Brits were ready for war, and Czechoslovakia was not the "right" issue to declare war over.
1938 Czechoslovakia was our Ukraine in 2014.
BH Obama was not willing to confront Russia over Ukraine and so he sent blankets to help Ukrainians. - In 1939, Poland was protected by treaty, and when Hitler invaded, the Brits & French were ready to declare war.
But by 1939 Hitler was not only unstoppable, when allied with Stalin's Soviet Union, there could be no serious contest in Poland.
Putin's 2021 second Ukraine invasion does not quite equate to 1939 Poland, for one thing, there's still no treaty protecting Ukraine, i.e., NATO membership.
However, as with 1939 Poland, the world now realizes this is very deadly serious, Putin must be opposed and stopped or his next invasion will be catastrophic. - And there's another similarity -- when Hitler allied with Stalin's USSR, he utterly doomed courageous Poland.
If now Vlad the Invader allies militarily with the Chinese Xi-snake, the resulting force-multiplier could overwhelm little Ukraine's courageous defenders.
(Which sounds exactly like the current regime, Victoria Nuland, et al.)"
Naw... Chamberlain's problem was not so much "hubris" as the question of when, exactly to oppose Hitler militarily?
Chamberlain could not see Czechoslovakia as the right time or place, but the fact is that Germany in 1938 was vastly weaker than it quickly became after 1939.
So second guessing Chamberlain requires inventing a scenario in which the Brits & French together could apply enough military pressure on Germany to drive Germany's military leaders to depose Hitler from power.
I've never seen a believable plan to do that, and obviously, Chamberlain himself didn't think he had that option.
WinstonSmith1984: "Russia would not have invaded Ukraine if the 2020 election had not been stolen from the American people and Donald Trump was President."
Agreed, except for your word "stolen", since that has never been proved.
What seems certain is that some laws were changed inappropriately to make legal what had always before been illegal.
WinstonSmith1984: "We are on the verge of WW3 because the United States of America is being led by and illegitimate regime who is happy to kill everyone in Ukraine in order to stay in power."
And now you're just wandering off into crazy-land, that's rubbish & nonsense, a fact-free narrative inspired by God-knows-what hatreds for Americans and Ukrainians.
WinstonSmith1984: "If you want to save the Ukrainian people... and all of us for that matter... take on the regime who stole the election in 2020."
Those are two totally separate issues.
The new Republican House of Representatives will begin to reign in the worst Democrat abuses of power, and investigate their worst corruptions.
The conservative Supreme Court will keep in check the worst of Democrat abuses of the US Constitution.
Now 2024 looks very promising for Republicans and could be that historic "red wave" we'd hoped for in 2022, IF our guys learn all the lessons of recent elections.
Yes, I do have a prediction for 2024, but it's still way too soon to begin saying such things out loud.
So my message here is: don't lose faith, don't lose hope, don't hate America or Americans and for God's sake, don't do anything to help Vlad the Invader in Ukraine.