Below The Beltway

I believe in the free speech that liberals used to believe in, the economic freedom that conservatives used to believe in, and the personal freedom that America used to believe in.

Bush Trots Out The Nazi Analogy

Usually sitting Presidents who are nearing the end of their final term in office don’t inject themselves too much into the battles between the men, or women, who would succeed them. They’ll campaign for the candidate of their party, of course, and be the guest of honor at $ 5,000 a plate fundraising dinners, but you usually don’t see Presidents in their seventh year in office getting into the gutter of a Presidential campaign.

Ronald Reagan didn’t do it when George H.W. Bush ran in 1988

Heck, even Bill Clinton restrained himself in 2000.

Then, there’s George W. Bush:

JERUSALEM (CNN) – President Bush launched a sharp but veiled attack Thursday on Sen. Barack Obama and other Democrats, suggesting they favor “appeasement” of terrorists in the same way some Western leaders appeased Hitler in the run-up to World War II.

The president did not name Obama or any other Democrat, but White House aides privately acknowledged the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party. Former President Jimmy Carter has called for talks with Hamas.

“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,” Bush said at Israel’s 60th anniversary celebration in Jerusalem.

“We have heard this foolish delusion before,” Bush said in remarks to Israel’s parliament, the Knesset. “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.”

Leaving aside the appropriateness of an outgoing President injecting himself into the race to succeed him, there’s just so much about this that’s just plain wrong. First of all, the United States engages in talks with real and potential enemies all the time, including nations like Iran, North Korea, and Syria; it’s called diplomacy and, as a wise man once said:

To jaw-jaw is always better than to war-war.

Second, there’s a difference between diplomacy and appeasement; the mere fact that you’re willing to talk to someone doesn’t mean that you’re the modern day equivalent of Neville Chamberlain.

Third, given the utter failure and questionable morality of the Bush Administration’s policy of pre-emptive war doctrine, perhaps we need more talking and less fighting in the world.

Finally, I think it’s time that we declared an official moratorium on Nazi and Neville Chamberlain analogies. World War II has been over for 63 years. Neville Chamberlain has been dead for 68 years. Instead of comparing everyone you disagree with villains from the past, how about actually engaging in a substantive debate.

That means you Mr. Bush.

5 Responses to “Bush Trots Out The Nazi Analogy”

  1. CR UVa says:

    So, I take it that you think negotiations with Hamas would be effective or good policy?

  2. Hamas isn’t a nation are they ?

  3. And another point that nobody has given me a good answer to.

    What is wrong with diplomacy ?

  4. CR UVa says:

    “Hamas isn’t a nation are they ?” Okay, if you’re going to play that way, where does President Bush say “nation”?

    “What is wrong with diplomacy ?” I understand this argument, but there is only one problem. Both sides have to be ready to come to the table ready to compromise and follow through. Seems like the U.S. is always ready to do this, but we have a hard time getting other nations on board.

    But then again, Bill Clinton did such a good job with North Korea, right? They’ve clearly made no efforts towards attaining nuclear power.

  5. Well, then, I’m not sure which “people” our feckless leader is talking about.

    Nobody credible that I’m aware of has talked about appeasing al Qaeda or Hamas or Hezbollah.

    On the other hand, even Bush’s one SecDef and SecState advocate diplomatic talks with Iran.

    So, should he fire Robert Gates and Condi Rice ?

[Below The Beltway is proudly powered by WordPress.]