Home
Refresh   Tag(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (more...) ; ; ;  (less...)
Add to My Group
October 13, 2006 at 01:04:40

View Ratings | Rate It

Appeasement - Republicans misuse the term so much it no longer means anything

by Steven Leser     Page 1 of 1 page(s)

www.opednews.com


Tell A Friend

September 29th, 1938 - Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy, England and France sign the Munich agreement. Hitler and Mussolini themselves along with Chamberlain and France's Daladier showed up to sign for their respective countries. The agreement ceded part of a non-participating country (Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland) to Hitler and Nazi Germany in exchange for Hitler's agreeing to halt further military conquests. The Munich agreement came on the heels of the annexation and incorporation of Austria into greater Nazi Germany via the Anschluss a few months earlier.

The context is thus that a power and land hungry dictator who had just annexed an entire country was given part of yet another country in the feeble hopes that he would be satisfied (appeased) with what was given to him and not take the rest of the continent or world. Through the appeasement of the 1938 Munich agreement, over 300,000 Czechoslovakian Jews came under the immediate dominion of Nazi Germany and soon found themselves transported to concentration camps.

Compare this with what Republicans today call appeasement. In January and February of 2003, suggesting that we give UN Weapons inspectors more time and more support to do their jobs verifying that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction was termed appeasement by Republicans. We see where that got us. Now, merely suggesting that we hold diplomatic talks with North Korea brings charges of appeasement. What's next? If one thinks about talking with China who is an ally of North Korea, we will be charged by Republicans with appeasing North Korea.

Republicans comparing the idea of sitting down and having a diplomatic discussion with Kim Jong Il with the Munich Agreement and its aftermath does a horrible disservice to many people and many efforts. First, it is a slap in the face to and trivializes the experience of Czech Jews, Gypsies and others and the family members of those sent who either endured terrible torture or died in Nazi concentration camps as a result of the Munich Agreement's appeasement. Second, it hampers the efforts of diplomats attempting to find honorable solutions to problems.


Sitting down and talking is not tantamount to capitulation. You can sit down and talk and take a hard line with someone or some country. The point is to talk instead of shoot, bomb and kill. When Reagan or George H. W. Bush talked with Gorbachev, were they appeasing him? If talking with a dictatorial leader or regime is tantamount to appeasement, maybe Republicans should insist we revoke any honors for these two ex-Presidents. Maybe then we will take their definition of appeasement seriously.

The truth is Republicans have misused the word to the point that it doesn't mean anything anymore. It is a word that is trotted out by members of the GOP whenever someone opposes their foreign policies. If anything, that is what appeasement now means. Republicans want to do something; you don't, so you are an appeaser. It no longer has anything to do with the other country/countries being discussed.

 

An OEN Editor, Steven Leser specializes in Politics, Science & Health, and Entertainment topics. He has held positions within the Democratic Party including District Chair and Public Relations Chair within county organizations. Steven Leser (more...)
 

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

 

Book Recommendations for "Bush Failed Policy"
A Bird in the Bush: Failed Domestic Policies of the George W. Bush Administration
by Dowling Campbell

$29.95

Number of pages: 228
Publisher: Algora Publishing

Empty promises: Why the Bush administration's half-hearted attempts at defense reform have failed (Policy analysis)
by David Isenberg


Number of pages: 19
Publisher: Cato Institute

View All Book Recommendations

Share this page: (what's this?)                   Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

FACEBOOK      DIGG THIS      Add This Page to Mr Wong!           NEWSVINE      DEl.ICIO.US      Looksmart Furl      NETSCAPE      My Web      Tag!RawSugar      Blink List     (More...)
Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
No comments

 
Want to post your own comment on this Article? Post Comment


 

Most Popular Articles
in the Last 2 Days
(by Recommend Emails)

Tampa, FL - UnitedHealth to Enter Funeral Parlor Industry by James Dunham

Rothschild's Federal Reserve Must Be Abolished by Allen L Roland

Photo Essay: Thoughts for the Fourth of July: Talking the Talk and Walking the Walk for Peace by Mac McKinney

Israeli Embassy Correspondence Concerning Spirit of Humanity Capture Clarifies Centuries of Conflict by Meryl Ann Butler

Health Insurance Exec Whistleblower Wendell Potter Testifies Before Congress by Wendell Potter

Did Obama Appoint People With Track Record of Making Right Decisions? by Ralph Nader

The true face of politics as 467,000 jobs were shed by Mary MacElveen

Obama Has No Legal Authority For Afghan War by Sherwood Ross

Torture on the 4th of July by Lawrence Gist

Hypocritical Repugnicans Owe WJ Clinton an Apology by David Gray

Go To Top 50 Most Popular

 

Tell a Friend: Tell A Friend

Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews

Powered by Populum