A few miles north of Tel Aviv lies the town of Herzliya on the Mediterranean seacoast of Israel. Within Herzliya, Barry Rubin and many others labor to run a think tank and publishing effort called Global Research in International Affairs or simply, GLORIA Center. Mr. Rubin reaches back into the archives of the New York Times to bring forth the history we are doomed to repeat if we elect a Barack Obama administration. While we are once again, as a people, being scolded to confer, negotiate and empathize with the most bloodthirsty, barbaric of the world’s powermongers, it is instructive to look back on the record just in case we might not want to duplicate our past mistakes. Barry Rubin writes the following…
Each day we’re told that radical Islamists, terrorists, and assorted extremists are going to moderate, so why not negotiate with them, appease them, defuse their grievances, have dialogue, and then everything will be okay.
But, those who are doubtful, argue, shouldn’t we have learned from history that militant ideologies are not prone to compromise and ruthless dictators don’t change their stripes. You cannot appease them, they don’t go away; displays of weakness make them more aggressive.
Oh, no! Not the Nazi analogy again!
And yet what can you say when confronted with this New York Times headline of December 21, 1924:
“Hitler Tamed By Prison; Released on Parole, He Is Expected to Return to Austria.”
The correspondent explains that Hitler, once a demigod for the extreme right, was released on parole from the Landsberg fortress where he had been sent for trying to overthrow the democratic German government in what has come to be known as the Beerhouse Putsch.
Prison, the article continues, seems to have moderated him. The authorities were convinced that he presented no further danger to the existing society. In fact, it was expected that he would abandon public life and return to his native land, Austria.
Well, that problem was certainly solved easily.
And also the Times learned its lesson, hasn’t it?
As the newspaper explained in a June 30 editorial:
“Few countries can afford the luxury of limiting their diplomacy to friendly countries and peace-loving parties. National security often requires negotiating with dangerous enemies.”
Right. And believing their protestations of moderation, making concessions to them, ending sanctions, blaming ourselves for problems, and never using force is the actual content of such negotiations.
Then the leaders of Hamas, Hizballah, Syria, Iran, the Muslim Brotherhoods, al-Qaida, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Sudan, etc., will no doubt be tamed, abandon public life, and go back to their homes.
Henry Kissinger once told the joke–or at least is credited for doing so–that it is very easy to have the lion lay down with the lamb, as long as you put in a new lamb every day. Kissinger no doubt little expected at the time that this would become the democratic world’s favored strategy. No surprise that the main villain for the politically correct West is Israel, the lamb that refuses the honor.
I would ask anyone to reassess their position that there is no difference between an Obama and McCain administration.
Hat Tip: Claudia Rosett
Filed Under Front Page ·
Comments
10 Responses to “Prisoner Recidivism & 72 Million Dead”Search
Our Sponsors
Poll
Loading ...LST Book Club
-
Defending Identity: Its Indispensable Role in Protecting Democracy
by Natan Sharansky -
Fear No Evil
by Natan Sharansky -
The Case For Democracy: The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny and Terror
by Anatoly Shcharansky -
The Jewish State: The Struggle for Israel's Soul
by Yoram Hazony -
Bobos in Paradise: The New Upper Class and How They Got There
by David Brooks -
Snobbery: The American Version
by Joseph Epstein -
A Conflict of Visions: Idealogical Origins of Political Struggles
by Thomas Sowell
Negotiating with terrorists is insanity. There needs to be “a rule change”, when a leader of a country, as in Ahmanutjob’s case, declares that a country should be “wiped off the map” he loses the right to live. We have a law that states we can not “take out” those leaders that openly threaten the existence of us or our allies; what a bunch of BS. Such statements are an open declaration of war and should be treated as such. When the above mentioned whacko makes such statements, Israel or the US, should, or I say must, take him out as he is an openly declared threat to national security. While nutjob the sock puppet is being taken out it is a good idea to take out the mulluh-ocracy with him so that they don’t just “change socks”.
#1 bonecrusher
Actually, it’s an executive order. IOW, it could be overturned with another executive order.
Extreme Right? Nazi means “Nationalist Socialism.” That doesn’t sound like right-wing ideaology to me.
History is doomed to repeat itself when idiots fail to study it. “New” and “fresh” (read: “hope and change”), does not always mean “better” or “improved”.
Tyrants are tyrants. Idiots are idiots. When these types run countries, millions of innocent people die.
Good morning all:
Read any book on history/politics going back as far as you want and you see the same pattern repeating itself. Sometime ago I reread the Prize and you see the oil industry repeating the same mistakes by trusting dictators. As soon as you attempt to negotiate with these folks you have lost because you are starting out willing to comprimise and are going to them. That puts them in the stronger position because you started the negotiation and want it to continue, to do that you have to give something up and they don’t. Make them come to us.
The one that cares the least controls the situation.
5 CC
You’ve prompted me to also re-read “The Prize”.
All
antifascists should be required read it before blogging.texpat, did you pre-clear this post with Pat Buchanan?
Here we are 33 years later and the liberal/anti war protestors of that era want to divorce themselves of their responsibility for the mass murder that took place in Vietnam and Cambodia starting in 1975. Vietnam only saw hundreds of thousands of executions - a pittance to the 1.7 million that occured in Cambodia.
Today’s liberals would sentence Iraqi’s to that same horror, and then just throw their hands up and walk away. But after all, they condone the murder of almost a million innocent babies in the womb or partially out of the womb every year in this country. It’s liberals that have no heart, no soul, no emotion. They can justify any
brutality to satisfy their own corrupt need for power and control. For them, the ends do justify the means.
I’ll cling to my guns and my Bible to thwart them. I’ll also have on hand sufficient ammunition - material and moral - to get rid of them if necessary.
But you know that people will cling to that notion. Either that, or the misguided idea that we need to bring this country to its knees before people will wake up. We may indeed have to hit bottom before a certain segment rouses from their slumber, but I think it is foolish to hasten the process, causing MORE pain than is necessary.
#9 jimb
Actually, by electing BO, we might really be lowering the bottom.
#8 b45
They’ve lost touch with their souls. If we were to leave Iraq early, we’d be sentencing tens of thousands of innocent people to death. We’d also be sentencing the region to even more instability, killing more people in the process. Very possibly people here to death because terrorists would have more secure bases from which to operate. At that point they would not see that their own actions/lack of action was the cause of the destruction, but they would blame it on the US for “stirring them up”, even though they’ve been stirred up since before the Jews got back from Egypt. We were stationed in Ankara Turkey in 1970-72 and they were blowing up stuff there back then.