Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.How is that wrong??
Victor David Hansen's analysis.
In short, nothing in the president’s speech was inaccurate, inflammatory, or hypocritical. Whether Barack Obama believes he was a target of the president’s rhetoric, or whether he would engage in appeasement, hinges on whether his overeagerness to talk without preconditions to the world’s thugs and rogues would persist in the face of unpleasant facts — and so make the likelihood of eventual military action more, rather than less, likely.
If you really want to see what he said, read this: Actual Text of the Speech Bush gave in Israel.
I would hope that Bush Haters would read the whole speech, but I frankly doubt it. Read Daily Kos and Huffington, or listen to Olbermanic, yea, there's real objectivity.
Never mind. I asked too much.
No comments:
Post a Comment