Oh Boy, lots of back and forth from Bush, Obama, McCain, on who is an [[appeaser]] and who isn’t, but you know, it might help if we all consider what the word actually means. I mean you know, so many use words with a totally different meaning, than what the word really means. It seems harmless enough, but then there is the other definition, the one most associate with Neville Chamberlain of Great Britian, who made consistent concessions to Adolph Hitler, and failed to secure the Peace who sought so desperately.

To pacify or attempt to pacify (an enemy) by granting concessions, often at the expense of principle.[1. American Heritage Dictionary]

It is in that context, that President Bush referred to the Democrats, meaning Barack Obama. Least that is the consensus of most people. It stems from comments made by Hilary Rodham Clinton in her various attacks on Obama, for his statement of a willingness to meet with the President of Iran, without any pre conditions. To Senator Clinton, and now both President Bush and Senator John McCain they are attempting to make it stick again, but examine the context of the words.

Senator Obama isn’t stating he is willing to grant any concession, merely a desire to talk and discuss the issues. After all, isn’t that the responsible thing to do? As a Jew I would still say that if there was a Hitler today, that it would be the Iranian President, or the leader of Hamas, but I would still want to talk to them first, before resorting to other means to keep them in line.

Sure Hitler used Chamberlain, and there is no doubt that Chamberlain granted many concessions, which led Hitler to believe that there were NO CIRCUMSTANCES under which the Allies would go to war. Certainly not over Poland, and that is a risk of Appeasement. It does generate a false sense of security for Dictators like Hitler, but that isn’t what Obama is saying. THERE IS A DISTINCTION HERE.

But with President Bush this week likening negotiations with “terrorists and radicals” to Nazi appeasement, foreign policy has clawed its way back into the center of the political conversation, teeing up an issue that Barack Obama and his aides view as a winning one for the campaign. (source – Politico dot com)

American Foreign Policy over the last several decades, has been one of Bullying, and of Threats. Whether it was George Bush Sr. or Bill Clinton, American policy has been to threaten and to bully other nations, into doing what America wants. Then at the same time, they have TURNED THEIR BACKS on longtime Allies, simply because it suited their economic plans. I mean look at Jimmy Carter and Iran. HE is the one responsible for the current nonsense in Iran, because he TURNED HIS BACK ON THE SHAH.

Now don’t get me wrong, the Shah was no Saint. Hell he was brutal, like any other Dictator is. No different than say the President of Egypt or the King of Saudi Arabia, or the Emir of Kuwait. Yet it was the Shah who best offered a chance for Middle East peace, until Jimmy Carter helped overthrow him. Now we are faced with that result of meddling, of appeasement to certain Interests.

It is like, American Policy is not about being a good neighbor, but more about forcing their will on others. Even in Egypt they don’t quite buy George Bush as a leader, or as someone to even fear. I mean look at Iraq, at how he went to war, for what? There was NO Al Quedya IN IRAQ until Bush Invaded. So, once again, US Self Interests, have delayed any chance for real Peace.

(CBS/AP) Egypt’s state-owned press opened fire Saturday on U.S. President George W. Bush as he arrived for talks with regional leaders at the conclusion of a five-day Mideast tour. (source – CBS News)

It really is simple. Yes, there are some nations that will never be friends, or allies, but there are many more who could become friends, or at least not want to knock your block off, if one adheres to a simple process of trying to be a good neighbor. For example, if your next door neighbor likes to party late at night, do you call the Police at the first hint of noise? Or do you go next door, knock, and ask them to turn it down, explaining you work early in the morning?

We had that, and you know, it works. Yes, we have had neighbors who didn’t give a shit, and sure we called the Police then, but FIRST WE TRIED TO TALK TO THEM. That is all Foreign Policy is, about TALKING, and that is what Obama is trying to return to. Neither Clinton, Bush, or McCain seem willing to do that, as they want conditions. It is like, the neighbors make noise, so I somehow tell them, I won’t come to talk about them turning it down until they stop making noise.

How is that going to work?

If every time your neighbor makes noise, or does something you don’t like, and you holler at them, or call the Police on them, how do you ever expect them to be friendly towards you, for when you may need their help? Like take for instance, needing them to keep an eye on your property while you go on vacation? Think they will bother, if their only association with you has been threatening, or mean spirited? Treating them with respect, with courtesy, will get you further, with most.

I mean Bush wants the Saudis to lower the price of Oil, or to produce More, and they have said NO. Anyone ever think it is because of Bush wanting to bring to a Monarchistic dictatorships Democracy? I mean would you want to help someone who supports you, but for a high price? Like disrespecting your own ruling King, your own Religion?