What did Neville Chamberlain do wrong?

Chris Matthews is an idiot.

Chris Matthews is an idiot? Maybe, but not in this clip. Here, the idiot is a guy hired to shout about a false historical analogy who didn’t bother to learn anything about the event to which he referred. Considering the weak historical knowledge among the general public — I can’t tell you the number of times that I’ve graded college exams where students insist that Germany won World War II — Matthews was doing his job by trying to get his guest to establish context by which viewers could assess the claim. His guest didn’t do his prep and he looked like a horse’s ass.

bridgett,

Why do you hate America?

The Chris’s, both Matthews and Hitchens are horse’s asses. The fact is that both of them have to get an even bigger idiot like the one who didn’t know who Neville Chamberlain was to look better.

Bridgett; you, being the student of history that you are, might know. Was Chamberlain to blame for Munich? I read an opinion, recently, that said he was playing the best game he could with a shitty hand. Hitler only got in the position he was in because of Germany’s post “Great War” malaise.

Peace in Our Time.

It does not surprise me in the least to see revisionist history about Chamberlain. There are pessimists, optimists, and pragmatists. Then there are people lost in their own fantasy world of everlasting peace and harmony.

Chamberlain was a fool. He is not the only one.

Chamberlain was playing a shitty hand. His country was still recovering very slowly from a global depression and the British military (while formidable) was in the midst of retooling. There was strong sentiment among many influential Britons that non-intervention was the way to go and he’d been inclined to stay out of conflict on the continent — see, for example, his policy during the Spanish Civil War the year before. The flower of British manhood had died in the trenches twenty years before and there was a dread of war that Americans (having been Johnny come latelys to World War I) might have had some trouble grasping. Europeans also generally overestimated Hitler’s strength. So, put that all together (without foreknowledge of the horror to come) and you can maybe understand how he arrived at this decision.

Also, most Americans don’t remember that Roosevelt’s policies in the 1930s were non-interventionist in nature. While the early part of the Battle of the Atlantic began to change that (by jeopardizing US shipping), there’s a strong case to be made that US forays into the Lend-Lease program was trying to help Britain, France, and Russia fight the war against Hitler so that American troops could stay out of a European war.

Not surprising, since FDR was practically the father of modern liberalism and that automatically makes him an appeaser, as are all liberal pansies.

Chamberlain was playing a shitty hand.>

Always vigilant. Always ready.

You have proven one thing, there are people living in their own fantasy world.

Even if Ahmadinejad had any real political power, Israel could whip Iran with one nuke tied behind its back.

Anti-Israel sentiment has been high among Arabs, for example, ever since the British overextended themselves after WWI. They have tried and failed to “wipe Isreal off the map” several times.

So now is a good time to start WWIII, just because some idiot runs his mouth about Isreal?

That’s not vigilance, that’s asinine.

Anti-Israel sentiment has been high among Arabs, for example, ever since the British overextended themselves after WWI.

So true. Anti-Israel sentiment was very strong decades before its existence.

That’s vigilance as well as clairvoyance.

Anyway, back to your regularly scheduled comment about idiots running their mouths about Israel already in progress.

Anti-Israel sentiment has been high among Arabs, for example, ever since the British overextended themselves after WWI. They have tried and failed to “wipe Isreal off the map” several times.

That is sad. Read a book. A history book. And learn how to spell “Isreal”.

The idea is to prevent a nuclear war, not encourage it, Neville.

Bridgett:

Thanks; that sort of jibes with what I read.

Numbskull8+3-2:

You typed:

“How difficult is “trust but verify”? We would not be in Iraq if Saddam Hussein had allowed inspections.”

Just how goddamned stupid are you? The inspectors were IN IRAQ when Bushit and Cheney decided that that their long planned attack had to happen before any more time went by. You are an idiot.

Captain Dumbass,

The Arabs were well aware of the Zionist movement before Israel declared statehood.

Number9:

Nitpiking typos now, whatever.

Prevent a nuclear war by declaring war on Iran? Great, we’ll continue the SpreadOfDemocracy™ (through coercion) all through the region, if there is anyone left alive to vote.

Brilliant!

The point is Israel seems to be quite capable of taking care of it itself.

Without discounting the dangers posed by Islamic radicals, the idea that the situation we currently face is somehow analogous to the threat posed by Nazi Germany is hallucinatory.

The Arabs were well aware of the Zionist movement before Israel declared statehood.

What do you mean? You would let Israel twist in the wind?

Numbskull8+3-2:

Just how goddamned stupid are you? The inspectors were IN IRAQ when Bushit and Cheney decided that that their long planned attack had to happen before any more time went by. You are an idiot.

Okay, that is funny.

Mr. Keats:

GOP is the new LSD.

Nutcase36/4:

“Okay, that is funny.”

How so, peabrain? Are you denying that it happened that way. You really need to read more than your weapons manuals.

You really need to read more than your weapons manuals.

Almost pithy.

Numberthannovocaine72/8:

Ah, that’s what I’ve come to expect from you and your reichwing pals. When you don’t know the answer, ignore or change the question. You are such an outstanding example of your type.

Without discounting the dangers posed by Islamic radicals, the idea that the situation we currently face is somehow analogous to the threat posed by Nazi Germany is hallucinatory.

This country has been attacked twice on our soil. First by the Barbary Pirates, who were Muslims, second by Islamic radicals on 9/11.

I realize history is inconvenient to you. Germany attacked out ships at sea. We responded by winning the worst War in history.

In this day and age it is stupefying to find people who celebrate Neville Chamberlain. Every conflict has appeasers.

Numbskull6-4+7:

You typed:

“This country has been attacked twice on our soil. First by the Barbary Pirates, who were Muslims, second by Islamic radicals on 9/11.”

Geez, with your genius for American History you should be teaching it. Let’s see, War of 1812, Pancho Villa, Pearl Harbor. Not an Islamist in the bunch.

History is obviously not an inconvenience to you, you dunce, nor are the facts. Are you truly as stupid as your comments indicate?

Oh, before I forget. The “USS Pueblo” (PRNK-1968), the “USS Liberty” (Israel 1973?)–some Kimcheefascists and some Zionofascists, no Islamists.

In this day and age it is sad to find someone, such as yourself who has such a tenuous grasp on reality and yet is allowed to purchase and own firearms.

Keep digging, bonehead.

Twice on our soil. Pearl Harbor was not part of America until 1958.

Learn how to process the words. Count on your fingers if needed.

Seriously, why are you here? Aren’t you more needed at Jesus General?

You are not making a difference except to demonstrate why education is so important.

We want to negotiate with Iran, but not for appeasement, for containment. IOW, we aren’t going to say, “we’ll give you this if you leave us alone”, but rather “please don’t make us kick your ass”.

In the meantime, we need to be getting our ducks in a row, in case you are right and war is inevitable, and by that I mean making sure all the nuclear powers are on the same page. Unfortunately, that includes Pakistan as well as Russia and China.

Numbitidyneun:

Your stupidity is impressive in its aggresive doggedness. You typed:

“Twice on our soil. Pearl Harbor was not part of America until 1958.”

From Wikipedia:

“Kingdom of Hawaii existed from 1810 until 1893 when the monarchy was overthrown by native born Hawaiians of American ancestry. It was an independent republic from 1894 until 1898, when it was annexed by the United States, becoming a territory in 1900, and a state in 1959.[10]”

Of course, as is typical of you and your Sixmeatpuppetpals, you simply ignore the other information that disproves your statment.

“Seriously, why are you here? Aren’t you more needed at Jesus General?

You are not making a difference except to demonstrate why education is so important.”

You are absolutely correct. Your lack of education is a subject that I will never grow tired of exposing.

dc, you wrote about the attack of Pearl Harbor as if Hawaii was a state. Then you get specific about which year it became a State?

Pathetic. You are a waste of time.

Numbnessbeyondbelief10-1:

You typed this:

“This country has been attacked twice on our soil. First by the Barbary Pirates, who were Muslims, second by Islamic radicals on 9/11.”

Which is JUST WRONG, you nitwit. The “Barbary Pirates” attacked American ships in the Mediterranean (and were actually “appeased” more or less, for about thirty years by succdessive governments of this young nation.

Hawaii was a U.S. possession at the time of the attack on Pearl Harbor. FDR, that great “appeaser” immediately asked his congress to declare war, which they did.

You are so uninformed that it is laughable. Please, continue.