During World War II, a poll was taken (I don't know who took the poll, but I am confident it is accurate):
The point is not to take time to explain each result, just that a majority of Americans did not want to fight. In what we now consider the greatest war for freedom and liberty, most Americans wanted no part.
Joseph P. Kennedy was Ambassador to the Court of St. James (American Ambassador to England) - he was habitually telling Roosevelt (via State Dept) not to intervene, that Germany was our friend and we should make our bed with Germany. It was not only American Ambassadors who wanted the US to pitch their tent with Germany, US Senators also fell prey to pacifism and capitulation - one such Senator was from Idaho by the name of William Borah.
Sidebar
According to Paul Mulshine, in a column he posted May 18, 2008, the person in question was Borah, but it was first reported twenty years after Borah died so ... who knows. Paul Mulshine fails to understand the point Bush was making, or rather, he was caught up in the Obamania and believes it was aimed at the Fluff King from Illinois, for Mulshine reports that Borah was a ... gasp ... Republican, not a Democrat.
End Sidebar
Many Americans, whether Democrats, like Joseph P. Kennedy, or Republicans like Borah, did not want to get involved.
On May 15, 2008, President Bush spoke to the Israeli Knesset in Jerusalem and one particular passage grabbed Democrats by the throat and began suffocating them (if their reactions are any indication). Bush told the Knesset that:
Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: "Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided." We have an obligation to call this what it is -- the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.
Within milliseconds, Obama was attacking Bush for making it political. Within an hour Biden attacked Bush and called his comments 'bullshit'. Then Obama took a swipe at McCain and blamed him. Harry 'We've lost in Iraq (even before the surge took place)' Reid attacked Bush's comments as reckless and reprehensible.
Unfortunately it really stung them. Obama had said and says we should be willing to engage in STRONG diplomacy with our enemies. Bush has engaged in STRONG diplomacy with North Korea - that's why they haven't continued with their nuclear testing. He has used STRONG diplomacy with Iran, and it is unfortunate that Obama and the Democrats play politics with this issue. I KNOW the US has engaged in low level diplomacy with Iran over its nuclear program - and I learned it from the media. You would SUPPOSE that a US SENATOR would learn it from ... say the intelligence committees they sit on! But it is easy to attack and do so personally, even while the statement had to do with a Republican Senator, not Obama. The White House came out later and said it was aimed at Jimmy 'Never met an Arab terrorist I didn't hug' Carter.
Not only was Bush not commenting on Obama, but the fact that Biden, Reid, Obama, and others attacked him on a political front, reinforces for me, their inability to function at a higher level. They reinforce why they are not qualified to be in government. Personal attacks using politics as your attack bludgeon when you know it is patently false is .... A LIE.
It is hilarious if it were not so serious.
Bush was addressing a philosophy - the one made very clear in the poll provided above, some Americans believed at the time - namely, to not get involved in the war. It was their war, it was not our war, use other methods, negotiate ... and in fact, Prime Minister Chamberlain and the French Foreign Minister Dalladier did negotiate with Hitler. They had tea with him. 3 times. Visited him at the Eagles Nest and in Berlin. 3 times they had tea.
Bush went on in his speech to the Knesset:
Some people suggest if the United States would just break ties with Israel, all our problems in the Middle East would go away. This is a tired argument that buys into the propaganda of the enemies of peace, and America utterly rejects it. Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong, because the United States of America stands with you.
Strange as it may seem, some people do believe Israel is the root of all evil in the Middle East. Sorry - the secular left do not believe in evil. They would instead argue Israel is an impediment to peace. Similar to Bin laden who calls Israel an impediment to Palestinian peace. Similar to Amadinejad who tells the world Israel is an impediment to the happiness of the world and needs to be fixed.
Between calls to negotiate and calls to fix, I honestly see no difference. I do see very clearly now that these men who lead a party that once produced very honorable leaders like John Kennedy, now produce puffs like Biden and Obama. Hold hands and sing Kumbaya and the world will be happy. Idyllic and idealistic - naive, and dangerous. "How dare they attack us after we negotiated in good faith." ... but those of us who understand the threat know there can never be good faith by those who wish to kill us, and negotiation is only carried out by the weak, not the strong. For bin Laden and his ilk throughout the Arab world, the weak are to be despised, not respected. It is the Democrats who have politicized this issue, not Bush.
Unfortunately, these leaders of the Democratic party have no clue about the threat of this day and age, and do not deserve to sit in the US Congress. That does not mean re-elect Republicans - it simply means, the Losercrats would fundamentally change our government and weaken us internationally, financially, and politically.
We know what Iran wants, we know what north Korea wants, we know what Saudi Arabia, China, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey ... want. We know what they want and we know why. We know their issues and they know ours. They cannot budge and honestly, we should not either.
Senator, tough negotiation - like the Clinton/Albright and North Korea negotiations? Where we ended up negotiating with them by giving them nuclear reactors to get them to behave ... and within six months and having received the reactors, they broke their agreement and proceeded to enrich uranium. That tough diplomacy, Senator? Or maybe the time when the Sudanese government offered to the US, bin Laden - and we turned them down because it was against the law. That type of tough negotiation Senator? No? Ok, we have to go back to Carter to find really tough negotiation - like what we did with Iran for 444 days. Senator, you have utterly no clue what negotiation means or how to do it. You are not qualified to head several committees let alone the delusion you have of being president of this country because your grandfather fought in World War II. You are qualified to represent a state in the congress - no more.
You sir, most assuredly are not like Jack Kennedy. More like Joseph P Kennedy, if the question is which Kennedy do you most reflect.
Posts
