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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (103256)	6/28/2003 9:11:26 AM
From: Neocon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You are certainly right that the public support was not there. However, if there had been more effective leadership, it is hard to predict what kind of posture would have been taken. The war correspondent William Shirer was in Berlin when the Germans remilitarized the Rhineland, and found out from Nazi officials who trusted him that had the French challenged the (illegal) move, the Germans would have retreated. The paralysis of the Allies convinced Hitler that he would prevail........

To: maceng2 who wrote (103256)	6/29/2003 1:27:46 AM
From: D. Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You're right, PB. In the 30s Europe was still recovering from an entire generation lost in WWI, and was understandably reticent. But why is it that the lessons of appeasement, which still rang strong as late as the Cuban Missile Crisis, have been lost on so many so quickly today? The United States had Vietnam to condition a large segment of the population into pacifism. But why have so many in Europe lapsed into complacency? Derek