Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stop the War! -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Machaon who wrote (12674)	4/12/2003 3:57:56 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 21614

Enforcement of the Security Council resolutions would be very much welcomed. You realize that does mean those West Bank settlements are history? Unfortunately the UN is more bark than bite. You notice I didn't say "UN"? Even if NATO were to be the guarantor, I'd say France should be specifically excluded. So you think Israel can stand off the entire ME w/o US help? Because that may be precisely where things are going. People are getting tired of us getting dragged into that brawl. When they get tired enough, you get to stand off the entire Arab world with whatever old hardware whoever will sell you. The same stuff they have. Then we'll see where this settles.

To: Machaon who wrote (12674)	4/13/2003 7:40:14 AM
From: craig crawford	Respond to of 21614

>> That was what Hitler said to Neville Chamberlain. Chamberlain agreed to give up land for peace. He gave up half of Czechoslovakia, in exchange for a "promise of peace". In other words, he gave up land in exchange for nothing, and thus showed Hitler that the free world was timid, scared, and weak. Hitler took half of Czechoslovakia, and then went on to take almost all of Europe. << the deceitful historians have brainwashed unsuspecting dupes such as yourself with regard to neville chamberlain. americans are woefully ignorant of the historical necessities of the situation. anyone intimately acquainted with the historical realities of the time realizes that neville chamberlain had no choice but to appease hitler at munich. chamberlain's mistake was not in appeasing hitler, that was one of his finer moments. his and britain's greatest mistake was not appeasing hitler even further! i know this is counter-intuitive to what everyone has been duped into believing about neville chamberlain, but what do you expect when you have a bunch of manipulators revising the history books to suit their own agenda. the simple fact is, if chamberlain had stood up to hitler at munich, hitler would have unleashed his fury on britain even earlier, and britain was woefully unprepared. chamberlain's "appeasement" of hitler was merely a tactic of necessitation to buy more time so britain could kick its war machine into gear. chamberlain's big mistake was in upholding that foolish war guarantee to poland. of course churchill stepped in after britian was better prepared (barely) to survive hitler's onslaught, and he gets all the credit for taking a stand and not being a timid appeaser like chamberlain. this is a con-job as well that americans buy into hook line and sinker. churchill was responsible for destroying the british empire, not rescuing it!