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: c.hinton who wrote (242206)	9/18/2007 5:41:17 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

Nadine what armies would have been marching in 1936?. the french!...so blame them...and dont you think they could have done something in spain or abysinnia....... The march into the Rhineland was in 1934, and both the French and English had armies that could have responded, but not the political will to respond. the point is Munich is a misleading cliché ment only to emotionalize the issue ...so stop yelling it. The point is wrong. England could have gone to war in 1938 with Czechoslovakia as an ally. Instead they went to war in 1939 against a stronger Germany without Czechoslovakia. The main difference between then and now was that Neville Chamberlain still had the capacity to realize that he had been lied to, and himself changed his mind about the Munich agreement when he realized that Hitler had broken all his promises. Today's appeasers never change their minds no matter how many times they are lied to...