Posted on 11/25/2025 11:12:19 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
In light of actual progress toward a peace proposal in the Russo-Ukrainian War, warmongers scrambled to hurl their favorite smear at the Trump administration. According to them, anything less than a total crushing victory over Russia is no different than British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain’s policy of appeasement toward Nazi Germany in 1938 and paves the way for further Russian aggression.
We’ve heard this accusation thrown around time after time from neocons, Democrat politicians, the propaganda press, and really anybody who is personally offended when America stays out of a foreign conflict for more than two seconds. Continuing in that vapid tradition, New York Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas Friedman wrote a piece titled “Trump’s Neville Chamberlain Prize.”
The piece was based on initial reports of a proposed 28-point peace plan offered by the White House. That plan would cap Ukraine’s military strength at 600,000 troops (which would still make it among the largest militaries in the world), prohibit NATO troops from being stationed in Ukraine, and give Russia all of the eastern provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk, the majority of which are already under Russian control. The White House announced Sunday that talks with Ukrainian officials about the peace plan had yielded a “updated and refined peace framework” but did not give details.
Given the current state of the war, these seem like reasonable terms. Russia gains a modest amount of Russian-speaking territory — ostensibly one of its main reasons for launching the war in the first place — from Ukraine, and it receives a de facto guarantee that Ukraine won’t join NATO.
But to Friedman, this is giving in to Hitler all over again. “If you force [the peace plan] upon Ukraine...
(Excerpt) Read more at thefederalist.com ...
At least Chamberlain tried to avoid the catalysm. Unlike some on FR trigger happy warmongers
In a way, there is a resemblance to chamberlain, but the biggest difference is the war has been going on for 3 years and over a million dead. Russias military has been decimated, its using 1960s era tanks, the supply depots exhausted, Black Sea destroyed, and Air Force not faring very well. The biggest factor is its sales of military hardware is non existent.
That 5% defense spending Trump insisted on will be more imperative for Europeans. It sets Russia up to torment them at any time and the US is in no position to defend someone who won’t defend themselves. Has Russia or any communist country lived up to it’s agreements? Germans vs. Russians-does it matter who loses?
There is no peace process.
“US Meets Russia Budanov UAE; Russia Rejects Outright EU Plan”
-Alexander Mercouris
I hope that peace will emerge from this. I try to be hopeful, but I’m not overly optimistic. Ukraine has accepted peace proposals in the past from the United States, only to have Russia reject them. I suspect we will see the same thing here, but I hope not.
Chamberlain had little choice. Britain at that point in time was in absolutely no position to go to war against Nazi Germany. Hindsight is always 20/20
Churchill chose wrong. I see that now. Chamberlain didn’t lose the empire, Churchill did.
Trump is the successor to Winston Churchill.
It seems that everybody in the world is either Hitler or Chamberlain.
“New York Times foreign affairs columnist Thomas Friedman”
ROFL
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.