# How long will appeasement work? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 9, 2002, 7:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998 "2002-11-09T07:01:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 4:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/41 "2002-11-11T04:02:11Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dewey Cheatem Undhow \* > **jshore** : I’ll need a cite for your Virginia example. I originally saw the story on what was apparently a PBS documentary but that I saw on Danish TV when I was visiting Denmark in the summer of 2000. [The documentary was basically on how people were being found to be almost certainly innocent based on DNA testing (in the sense that the major piece of physical evidence was found not to incriminate them) but, in some cases, were still having trouble getting retrials or released. In some cases, they were on death row; in some cases not. It was very difficult to explain to the two Danish friends I watched it with what the mentality was in the U.S. that would allow this to happen without people being up-in-arms…But, I tried.] At any rate, here is a link that I found to the story. I’ve only had a chance to glance at it, but it sounds like the case that I had heard about: [http://www.insideout.org/documentaries/dna/thestories2.asp](http://www.insideout.org/documentaries/dna/thestories2.asp) ---
**Author:** ![Chumpsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9a140/32.png) [@Chumpsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chumpsky)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 8:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/42 "2002-11-11T08:29:09Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Fang \* > \*\* > > Jeez, one would have thought you might want to do a little research before making so foolish a statement. Just do me a favor and reconcile that with a recent [poll](http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr021030.asp), where 79% support invading Iraq with UN support, and 58% support invading iraq without UN support. Not that public opinion proves a cause right or wrong, but you really shouldn’t change the facts to fit your precious theory. > > On another note, it’s interesting to see ultra-leftists getting all huffy about “appeasement”… \*\* Why is that? I don’t think aggression should be appeased. Aggression is the most serious crime you can commit, according to the Nuremburg Tribunal, a judgement I agree with. We can debate about the proper response to aggression, but at the very least we have an obligation to _not support it_. Germany, for example, should not have been granted permission to invade Czechoslovakia, even though its claims to the Sudetenland had much more validity than do the U.S. claims about Iraq. As for the polls, of course, it depends very much how the questions are asked and in what context. For example, in [this poll](http://www.mondotimes.com/poll/archive/invadeiraq.html), asking if the U.S. should invade Iraq, 51% said yes, and 41% said no. [Another poll](http://www.pollingreport.com/iraq.htm) shows 64% favor military action in Iraq, but 63% also saying that the U.N. should be given more time. For another example, check out this [ABCNews poll](http://abcnews.go.com/sections/politics/DailyNews/iraq_poll021007.html), in which it is claimed that 44% believe that we should hold off on military action and give diplomacy a try, thus completely repudiating Bush’s policy of avoiding diplomacy at all costs, and doing everything possible to start a war. Notice, though, how leading the questions asked are. For example, one of the questions is, “What is more important: removing Saddam, disarming Iraq or tracking down al Queda.” Notice the hidden assumption there that we have a right to remove Saddam. Imagine, if you will, a set of poll questions that asked the following? 1. Do you believe Bush is being honest with the American people regarding Iraq, given the recent history of the administration in prevaracation and dissembling? 2. Do you believe the U.S. should invade Iraq, given that Iraq poses no threat to the U.S.? 3. Do you believe that the U.S. should violate every norm of international law going back to the [1648 Treaty of Westphalia](http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/westphal.htm) declaring that all states have equal rights? etc. You get the picture. The national polls that are being conducted are mostly about eliciting support for war, and buttressing the claims of the administration. Every society seems to have its commissars… ---
**Author:** ![istara](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e79b87/32.png) [@istara](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/istara)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/43 "2002-11-11T08:43:54Z")
It’s very easy to argue dispassionately about the rightness or wrongness of waging war in some foreign clime when you don’t know anyone personally there. It’s a hell of a lot harder when you have Iraqi friends with innocent and young families back in Iraq. Sure - I would like to see them delivered from what is in many ways a “reign of terror.” I would love to see a “rehabilitated” Baghdad that could regain its former glory as a true world city and trading centre. The country is rich in oils, mineral wealth, for thousands of years it has been a city of culture and learning and internationalism. But I would like to see every single other method exhausted before the bombs drop down and kill the very children whose lives they are allegedly trying to improve. It may be that eventually this will be a necessary sacrifice for the greater good. But right now I don’t believe that it is necessary, and I do believe that the pro-war lobby have other motives than concern for suffering Iraqi people, or increased regional instability/conflict in whatever form that might take. These are motives - and valid ones - but they’re certainly not the only motives (or even the main ones) behind what is going on with Bush and Blair. ---
**Author:** ![Chumpsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9a140/32.png) [@Chumpsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chumpsky)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 8:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/44 "2002-11-11T08:53:17Z")
“Statesmen will invent cheap lies, putting blame upon the nation that is attacked, and every man will be glad of those conscience-soothing falsities, and will diligently study them, and refuse to examine any refutations of them; and thus he will by and by convince himself that the war is just, and will thank God for the better sleep he enjoys after this process of grotesque self-deception.” The preceeding was written by Mark Twain almost a century ago, in his lament over U.S. imperialism’s murderous attack on the Phillipines. It could have been written yesterday. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\*We’ve been had. Conned, cozened, duped, flim-flammed. Lied to in bushel baskets. Its the same old crapola that always works, time after time after time. Start pounding the drums, and the brains go right out the window. > > Want a little trip down memory lane? Go look up Operation Urgent Fury, the invasion of Grenada. Iraq pales in comparison to this snow job, it was a used car salesmans wet dream.\*\* You are quite right to bring up this example of propaganda being used to rile up the populace to support some war or another. In fact, though, the record of deceit by the U.S. state is a long and sordid one. The first large-scale propaganda campaign was initiated by Wilson, shortly after he was elected in 1912. He ran on a pacifist platform, with the slogan “Peace Without Victory.” Of course, he was simply lying about that, and dearly wanted to get the U.S. involved in the capitalist war in Europe. He formed the first and only official propaganda agency, The Committee on Public Information it was called (nice Orwellian title), also known as the Creel Commission. The purpose of the committee was to turn the pacifist American populace into a bunch of raving anti-German lunatics. It worked brilliantly. Within months, the country was involved in the War to End all Wars. Propaganda has been refined over the years to near-perfection. It is to the point where the majority of Americans can believe that a country that has been ravaged by two major wars in 20 years, and has been suffering under the most strict economic sanctions in history can pose a threat to the most dominant military that has ever existed. That is quite an accomplishment. The lies have always flowed from the lips of U.S. leaders, from lies about the blowing up of the Battleship Maine to justify entry into the ludicrously titled “Spanish American War,” to lies about Hun atrocities to justify entry into WWI, to lies about “communists” infiltrating Latin American governments to justify overthrowing the democracies of Guatemala and Chile, to lies about Libyan involvement in the bombing of a German discotheque to justify bombing Libya, and on and on. Of course, the all-time record holder for the amount of lies told has to be Vietnam. Never have so many leaders poured forth so many lies. Yet, the press ate it up, repeating every idiotic lie coming out of the White House as gospel. The same is true today. The administration repeats lie after lie. If it isn’t Cheney claiming Iraq kicked out inspectors in 1998, it is Rumsfeld claiming that the patrolling of “no-fly zones” is according to a U.N. mandate, or it is Condoleeza Rice and Bush claiming that the IAEA stated that Iraq could have a viable nuclear weapon in six months, and on and on it goes. And every word is repeated by the press, unchallenged and unquestioned, as the vicious, lying murderous bastards that call themselves our leaders lead us into war. “I am an anti-imperialist. I am opposed to having the eagle put its talons on any other land.” -Mark Twain ---
**Author:** ![Chumpsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9a140/32.png) [@Chumpsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chumpsky)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 9:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/45 "2002-11-11T09:12:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by bizzwire \* > **_Chumpsky_, you carry on as if Iraq is some sort of bespectacled 98-pound weakling who keeps getting picked on by the class bully. Iraq initiated an unprovoked attack on Kuwait. Its army killed, raped and looted. When met with miltary resistance, they fled after first setting Kuwaiti oil fields ablaze, making them, in my mind at least, first-class scumbags.** Unprovoked? Well, that is debatable. If you accept the premises of Bush, then Iraq had every right to invade Kuwait. What is not debatable, however, is that Iraq explicitely obtained permission from the U.S. to invade Iraq. Also, most of the stories you heard about Iraqi atrocities in Kuwait were just made up. That isn’t to say that what Iraq did wasn’t a crime. Obviously it was a crime, one that almost equalled the crime that the U.S. committed in Panama only a few months earlier. However, tales of Iraqi atrocities were greatly exaggerated, and in some cases simply made up, such as the tale of babies being taken out of incubators that was used to great effect by Bush, the congress and the pundits. > [@](#): > > **There was ample opportunity to press the war into Baghdad. This did not happen, Iraq was not “carved up,” and Saddam Hussein remains in power.** According to U.S. desires, or very near their desires. The State Department spokesman at the _New York Times_, Thomas Friedman actually described the “best of all possible worlds,” namely an “iron-fisted dictator who would rule Iraq exactly the way Saddam did,” but without Saddam. They wanted the iron fist, and they had to make due with Saddam. Now they see an opportunity to have “Saddam-ism without Saddam” to borrow an old Reaganite term. > [@](#): > > \*\*While you will doubtless claim that this was all part of a western plot, the fact remains that the Iraq drew the first blood, yet the only price they had to pay for their failed belligerence is to demonstrably disarm. They got off pretty easy, if you want my opinion. \*\* If turning the most advanced and wealthy Arab country into a ruins is getting off easily, I suppose you are right. If the destruction of water sanitation facilities, electrical power plants, etc., and then the prohibition against importing materials to build them is getting off easily, then you are right. If a rapid increase in birth deformities resulting from the use of depleted uranium is getting off easily, then you are right. If a **doubling** of the death rate for children under 5 is getting off easily, then you are right. If at least 1/2 million dead children is getting off easily, then you are right. Oh, but perhaps you are talking about the consequences for Saddam himself? In that case, you are correct. The sanctions have had no effect on Saddam’s grip on power, and in fact increased it. It is only the people of Iraq who have suffered. And, now they will suffer even more. ---
**Author:** ![Chumpsky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e9a140/32.png) [@Chumpsky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chumpsky)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 10:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/46 "2002-11-11T10:19:15Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Sam Stone \* > **Are you suggesting that Grenada wasn’t taken over by Marxist revolutionaries? Every description of Bernard Coard I’ve ever seen described him as a hard-line Marxist. And it was a bloody coup, not a democratic election.** Coups against ruthless, bload-soaked dictatorships are generally not carried off through democratic elections. In fact, it is very difficult to have elections at all when you live in a dictatorship like the one Grenada had under Gairy. And, actually, Bishop did some very good things for Grenada. After the 1979 coup, Bishop installed a revolutionary government that went to work organizing workers’ councils and creating a very participatory government. He worked to develop the island, and received aid mainly from Cuba and the Soviet Union, and later the Sandinistas of Nicaragua. One of the chief efforts of Bishop was the construction of an airplane runway in order to further tourism for the nation. Of course, the justifications given by the U.S. for invading Grenada were ludicrous. What was the real reason for invading a country of 100,000 people? Well, there was a very real threat that Grenada would become a good example. They were well on their way to creating a very progressive society. This is a very dangerous threat to U.S. imperialism, as it can spread to other countries. If people see that a small country like Grenada can work outside of the U.S. system to build its society on socialistic ideals, they could be motivated to take things into their own hands, and start to do the same in their own country, using the wealth of their countries to benefit the citizens, as opposed to Wall Street. > [@](#): > > \*\*By the way, that invasion was cheered by the people of Grenada. Only 19 Americans, and less than 100 Cubans and Grenadan military were killed. And the result was that an unfriendly, despotic regime was replaced by democracy. Grenada was a great success story. \*\* You are right that 19 Americans died during the glorious conquest of Grenada, when 6,000 elite troops succeeded in overcoming the resistance of several dozen Cubans and some Grenadan militiamen, winning 8,000 medals of honor for their bravery. You have your timing wrong, though. The unwanted despot was removed in 1979. ---
**Author:** ![rampisad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/858c86/32.png) [@rampisad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rampisad)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/47 "2002-11-11T11:12:25Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lemur866 \* > \*\* So what are we going to do about it? Compare the US to Nazi Germany, like our hysterical friend Chumpsky? \*\* Actually, I don’t think Chumpsky compares the US to Nazi Germany, because he admires the latter far too much. I think he is saying that the **cause** of all this trouble is the same in both cases - it’s those stinking Jews again. Never seem to be able to learn their place! ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/48 "2002-11-11T12:49:19Z")
**rampisand** : what an utterly contemptible bit of drivel. I have a response to **Sam** , but I won’t insult him by placing on the same page. ---
**Author:** ![hawthorne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@hawthorne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/hawthorne)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 1:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/49 "2002-11-11T13:04:49Z")
I’ll help fill up the page then. I’d still like an answer to > [@](#): > > What action would have made you reconsider their motives? ---
**Author:** ![rampisad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/858c86/32.png) [@rampisad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rampisad)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/50 "2002-11-11T13:27:04Z")
since elucidator thinks that an insult is a valid reply, I’m out of here, but not before letting Chumpsky, with his own words, justify my original comment… Saddam was [sic] a brutal Fascist, but like some Fascists he did invest in the country. Terrorism was used extensively by the Zionists before Israel achieved independence. The U.S./Israeli alliance stands alone in the world in opposing this solution. The only obstacle to a peaceful settlement is the U.S./Israel. Israeli Zionists justify their supreme injustice by appeal to a holy book written a few thousand years ago by a bunch of priests. If Israel/U.S. (at this point Israel is little more than a U.S. military base) were to seek a just peace, Israel would become much more safe. Furthermore, Israel has never been attacked since 1948 (and even that is murky). It’s those damn Jews again, never knowing their place. ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/51 "2002-11-11T14:59:41Z")
> [@](#): > > I don’t think Chumpsky compares the US to Nazi Germany, because he admires the latter far too much. Boy, I’d sure like to see a cite where Chumpsky ever said he particularly admired Nazi Germany. Or did I miss something? ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/52 "2002-11-11T17:36:20Z")
> [@](#): > > The first large-scale propaganda campaign was initiated by Wilson, shortly after he was elected in 1912. He ran on a pacifist platform, with the slogan “Peace Without Victory.” Of course, he was simply lying about that, and dearly wanted to get the U.S. involved in the capitalist war in Europe. History student here: My jaw is dropping _off of my face_ at the amount of misinformation carried in this post. 1. Even without trying to define “first large-scale propaganda campaign” I can say this is utter hogwash. 2. Wilson did run on an anti-war platform, but was hardly intending to go all out for the war. he was not pleased, but saw no other way to break the stalemate in Europe from Kaiser WIlhelm’s ahggression. Added to the fact of relative French and British innocence, he felt he had no other choice. Whther he made his mind to go to war by the election or not is a matter of debate. 3. “Dearly Wanted”, my Burro 4. “Capitalist War?” Imperialist, maybe, given Austria’s territorial and political ambitions over Serbia sort of started it, (along with everything else). Capitalism was not, in anyway, shape or form, a factor in the “Great War”. In fact, America was doing just fine with Capitalist endouvers before the war, and did not need any help. Besides, what would anybody get out of it? 5. Wilson, as you may now, was one of the big promoters of the League of Nations, which he hoped would be key to stopping another such conflict. He also pushed for relatively light German punishment; hardly the thing one expects from a “competitor” nation. 6. Honestly, **Chumpsy** at least _try_ to see the world in more ways than the simplistic assumption that anyone powerful must by definition, be evil. (Although I suppose that’s too much to expect from someone who named themself after Nome Chompsky.) ---
**Author:** ![El\_Kabong](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/el_kabong/32/496_2.png) [@El\_Kabong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/El_Kabong)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 8:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/53 "2002-11-11T20:09:16Z")
Man, what a mess. Is **Chumpsky** the leftist **december** , or what? Geez, count the off-the-wall assumptions that ya gotta wade through even before getting to a point worth debating. > [@](#): > > The members of the security council, either too afraid of the consequences of crossing the U.S. (perhaps recalling the case of Yemen voting against the first Gulf War, and the consequent punishment of the tiny, impoverished country), or were happy to go along, after being assured that they would get their piece of the pie when Iraq is carved up. Other goodies being handed out to the sufficiently servile were passes on monstrous crimes, such as the terror war Russia is waging in Chechnya, and the ongoing repression of dissidents in China, etc. and > [@](#): > > Regarding the carving up of Iraq, I mean this is no secret. If you have been following this issue at all, you should know that a main sticking point with France and Russia was the large contracts the two countries had with Iraq to develop its oil fields once the sanctions are lifted. Furthermore, Iraq is indebted to Russia for some $8 billion, I think. In order to get the two countries to go along with the U.S. war, the U.S. had to promise them a piece of the pie. Stirring rhetoric; too bad it strikes me as utterly empty posturing. Please show by cite exactly how the US intends to “carve up” Iraq (by which I presume you mean that different parts of the country are to be occupied and administered by different nations), and what specific promises the US has made to France and Russia in this regard. Also, please show by cite that a) the US has handed out “passes” to Russia and China in return for a yes vote on the resolution on Iraq. If you can’t manage the last bit, please show that the US stance re: the Russia/Chechnya conflict and/or Chinese dissidents has substantially changed in the past few months, and that such a change has something to do with obtaining a “yes” vote on the resolution just voted on by the Security Council. Better yet, if what you really want to debate is US policy towards Russia and China, why not start a new thread entitled something like “US ignores Russian and Chinese terrorism while threatening Iraq” stating what you believe these acts are and what specific actions the US should take against them, and we’ll see what holds water and what doesn’t. Oh yeah, and **rampisad** , what the flurking hell do you think you’re talking about? 'Cause I for one haven’t a clue. ---
**Author:** ![smiling\_bandit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e9a140/32.png) [@smiling\_bandit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smiling_bandit)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/54 "2002-11-11T21:42:38Z")
I thought about trying to take on Rampisad, but I figured no one listening to him would ever consider my humble words understandable. Here goes: > [@](#): > > since elucidator thinks that an insult is a valid reply, I’m out of here, but not before letting Chumpsky, with his own words, justify my original comment… Given your lack of coherant replies, I can understand **elucidator’s** response. > [@](#): > > Saddam was [sic] a brutal Fascist, but like some Fascists he did invest in the country. And this means what, exactly? Does it somehow excuse the fact he is a brutal tyrant? And lets not get into the fact that he is in no way a fascist, a fact that anyone who understands comparitive political systems (commonly Poly Sci 102 for you Collegiates) could tell you. Fascism is a very specific idea. > [@](#): > > Terrorism was used extensively by the Zionists before Israel achieved independence. By _SOME_ Zionists, perhaps. Most Jews did not go out blowing up Palestinians. Moreover, what is your point? > [@](#): > > The U.S./Israeli alliance stands alone in the world in opposing this solution. > > The only obstacle to a peaceful settlement is the U.S./Israel. ??? What solution? A Palestinian State? The destruction of Israel? Jehovah coming down to smite the unbelievers? The US, you may recall, supports the idea of a Palestinian State so long as it pleadges peace with Israel. > [@](#): > > Israeli Zionists justify their supreme injustice by appeal to a holy book written a few thousand years ago by a bunch of priests. 1. A Few of them do. In fact,. most just don’t want to be killed by the giant tide of Muslim states and peoples, ofetn unfriendly, around them. In any event, where would you put your nation? In some remote backwaters of where you ancestors had never gone, or some remote backwaters where you ancestral kingdsom thrived, and you people lived for millenia. 2. Your dissmissal of the Torah is… disturbing to me. If you wish to debate its accuracy… go to another thread. Aside from which, whom do expect to write a Holy Text? God’s prohets and Priests (often, the only people who could read), or an illiterate shepherd. > [@](#): > > If Israel/U.S. (at this point Israel is little more than a U.S. military base) were to seek a just peace, Israel would become much more safe. Israel a US Military Base? RotFLMAO!!! I think the Israeli’s might have something to say about that. > [@](#): > > Furthermore, Israel has never been attacked since 1948 (and even that is murky). Define “attacked”. In the 1967 war, Egypt blocked off Suez canal access while the UN and Britain and Franced ignored Israeli pleas for them to adhere to their treaty obligations. Neighboring Arab states began a series of offense moves and military buildup. Now tell me, in this case, do you A) Roll over and wait to be conquered and possibly eradicated B) Attack first, win the initiative, and break the tightening noose? C) Say “Hi Opal!” You may not like it, but the Israeli’s saw no choice but to fight or die. And perhaps you forgot about a little thing called the Yom Kippur War? Perhaps Syria’s mass offensive slipped past your razor-shap intellect? While Egyption forces attacked across the Suez? [http://dir.yahoo.com/Regional/Regions/Middle\_East/Arts\_and\_Humanities/Humanities/History/By\_Time\_Period/20th\_Century/Military\_History/Arab\_Israeli\_Wars/](http://dir.yahoo.com/Regional/Regions/Middle_East/Arts_and_Humanities/Humanities/History/By_Time_Period/20th_Century/Military_History/Arab_Israeli_Wars/) ---
**Author:** ![rampisad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/858c86/32.png) [@rampisad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rampisad)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2002, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/55 "2002-11-13T13:42:44Z")
Show me quote by Chumpsky in which he critisizes Nazi Germany. I’ll show you 10 where he rates the US the greatest evil ever to inflict mankind, or some similar rhetoric. ---
**Author:** ![rampisad](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/858c86/32.png) [@rampisad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rampisad)\ **Post date:** [November 13, 2002, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998/56 "2002-11-13T14:00:31Z")
My favourite travel author, Bill Bryant, said never to try to use irony in America, they just don’t understand it. I seem to have been much too ironical in my postings, so let me explain. In my opinion, Chumpsky epitomises the “simplistic solution” approach that has taken the American intelligensia and education establishment so far to the left of the spectrum that they’ve actually fallen off the planet and are in free fall. The words in my last post, to which you have rightly taken exception, were direct quotes from Chumpsky’s mouthings in this forum. When you read his stuff, you will see that everything wrong with the world today can be attributed to one single cause, the evil US/Israel axis. He is incapable of rational argument, using loaded words like “fascist” and “racist” in place of reason. In my case, he’s really hit the wrong button, because I’ve spent a lot more time in South African jails for fighting apartheid than he (or any of his cohorts) have even in their puerile dreams. I’ll stack my record against racism against anyone in his camp, and I’ll come up smelling like roses! So, my friend, the bottom line is I was trying to make your exact argument, but using reverse logic. Chumpsky and his ilk are no better than the holocaust-deniers, and anti-Semites without a moral bone in their bodies. Am Yisrael Chai! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-long-will-appeasement-work/135998.md?page=2)