Edmund Burke wrote “Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.” Is that what is happening today with the US making a deal with Iran or is it something altogether different?
Let’s look at the historical parallels we already have in History. ALL through history there have been bad deals and broken treaties. In every nation and every time there have been tribes and nations making deals they thought would end conflict, struggle and war or provide certain benefits and almost without exception these treaties have been broken.
Worse, many treaties are poorly disguised attempts at appeasement. Appeasement in a political context is a diplomatic policy of making political or material concessions to an enemy power in order to avoid conflict. As a general rule, NO person or nation respects this… They see it as evidence of fear and weakness and will treat the parties who appease them accordingly.
One of the best examples of how appeasement does not, generally, earn the desired result/s can be found in the person of Neville Chamberlain after the First World War and before and during World War II. Great Britain (and other nations including France) was desperate to prevent war at almost all costs. This led to Chamberlain signing what is often called the Munich Agreement. Basically, it assured Germany that Britain and France and Italy would not oppose their efforts to Annex or seize partial control of parts of Czechoslovakia. After the Munich Agreement, Chamberlain sought additional assurance of Germanys’ peaceful intent towards Czechoslovakia, requesting restraint and no bombing should Prague resist.
He asked for an additional meeting with Hitler where he produced a paper tiled Anglo-German Agreement that read in part that Britain and Germany agreed the Munich Agreement was “symbolic of the desire of our two people never to go to war again”. Hitler and Chamberlain signed it and then later when some of Hitlers’ men expressed concern over the new agreement he said “Oh, don’t take it so seriously. That piece of paper is of no further significance whatever.” Meanwhile, Chamberlain proudly patted his pocket upon return to his hotel stating “I’ve got it”.
Further demonstrating just how differently two parties can view the same agreement, Chamberlain said about the deal made “My good friends, this is the second time there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time.”
King George was thrilled until he met with Duff Cooper, then First Lord of the Admiralty (the equivalent of one of our Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Four Star Admiral CNO or Chief of Naval Operations) who resigned his post over the Munich agreement. The King respected Coopers’ convictions but said that he didn’t share them. The aging queen couldn’t understand why some people were opposing the agreement and wondered why those who disagreed couldn’t just be happy the Prime Minister had brought them peace.
The vast majority of news media of the time supported the efforts of appeasement as well.
However the Commons (a lower house of Parliament which is the law making body and loosely similar to the US House of Representatives while Parliament is similar to the US Congress which passes laws) met soon after and heard Duff Coopers reasoning for resignation as well as other protestations including strident opposition from Winston Churchill but no Conservative member actually voted against the government. Somewhere around 30 abstained including Cooper and an almost eerily prescient Churchill who said “”England has been offered a choice between war and shame. She has chosen shame, and will get war”.
Chamberlain had been re-arming the nation and generally bolstering national defense and this proved both fortunate and very smart as it soon became clear that Hitler didn’t care about the agreements he had signed as he invaded Czechoslovakia. This act prompted Chamberlain to start taking deterrent actions that ultimately led to Great Britain entering the war. Though Chamberlain might also be accused of being in a position to have known better than to trust Hitler since during the negotiation talks after agreeing to several points and then flying to present the terms to Czechoslovakia, he returned only to find that Hitler now said those terms would no longer do!
We have an incredible number of similarities here to the situation in Iran.
We’ve got President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry crowing that they have “made the world safer”.
We’ve got a lackey media that for the most part thinks this decision, like ALL Democrat decisions is AWESOME and good for America.
We’ve also got a KNOWN bad faith actor in the Mullahs and leadership of Iran.
We’ve got almost ALL military advisers saying that a deal with Iran is a bad idea and that Iran must NEVER be allowed to get the bomb.
We’ve got Conservative AND some Liberal opposition to this plan.
We also have several RED FLAGS we don’t see in the Munich Agreement!
We’ve got general intelligence consensus that Iran is the LARGEST State sponsor of Terror in the WORLD!
We’ve got the President and his people ADMITTING that this deal doesn’t depend on Iran changing this!
We’ve got the same people saying they KNOW that Iran will cheat on this deal and continue to sponsor terror!
We’ve got Iran, through its’ leadership and people still saying death to Israel and America….
We’ve also got Iranian people partying in the streets over this deal.
Why are we lifting sanctions and trade restrictions almost instantly giving them access to 100 BILLION dollars?
WHY are we making ANY deal with such people?
As bad as the Chamberlain appeasement was, this is exponentially worse! Does anyone REALLY think that Chamberlain would have attempted to make his deal with Germany if they were chanting Death to Great Britain?
In my humble opinion, this is one of the WORST decisions that have ever been made by any US President. It makes us look, weak, fearful and ineffective.
The President acts as if the choice was cut a deal (which gives us NOTHING by the way, not even our four American citizens they have in prison) or go to war….
Either or reasoning is almost always a logical fallacy as there are always other choices between a fight to the death or fleeing in fear. However, if it comes down to that choice I would take war over the national shame of capitulating to an enemy still saying death to America and to our ONLY ally in the Middle East Israel.
We weren’t offered a choice between shame and war we actually requested, negotiated and begged for the right to be shamed and just as was the case in the Munich Agreement, I fear we will get war…. Perhaps this isn’t about not knowing history but is about setting up the potential for WW III.
Does anyone recall ever reading about a world war with the world against Israel?
Saudi Arabia and Israel both say this is a bad deal that will start a nuclear arms race in the Middle East if Iran gets the bomb!
IDK about you, but when I see Jews and Arabs AGREEING on something? I KNOW it’s true or that it’s a sign of the Apocalypse! Sadly, the White House looks outside and sees Dogs and Cats sitting together, howling and yowling the SAME song and claims to see it as evidence their “peace initiatives are working”!