You skate in such a tight curve around Godwin that I am surprised that the centrifugal power created hasn’t auto-ejected you from the thread. Aside all the frothing idiocy and unfounded hatred that one could arguably read into statements as yours, you are as Tom has pointed out just flat out wrong.
Let me add some views to that. From a European perspective in the 1930s appeasement of Hitler’s Germany was not an ideological question based on ‘understanding’ or ‘accepting’ Nazism. Chamberlain’s appeasement politics had support in real politics argued from the geopolitical realities of Europe at the time. Hitler’s frivolous claims to Sudeten, Bohemia etc. had some historical support.
In the strange climate created by the collapse of the ‘united’ French British postwar punitive front against ‘the Hun’ and the harsh effects of the Depression it looked sensible to let Germany stand up and assume a renewed position of respect in Europe. This was of course completely idiotic had one known what would come to pass, which they didn’t.
Churchill and a few others tried to stop these efforts, again the argument evolved mostly along the lines of opposing the expansionist plans and rearmament of Germany. Thereby not saying that Winston and others didn’t see the evil ideological sides of Hitler’s politics on top of that. In fact most sensible politicians considered the NSDAP an aberration, it was just a question of choosing what way you could contain this plague without waging a renewed war on Germany.
The Pacific situation was even more complicated. Japan’s wars were not fought on a NSDAP-like ideological basis at all. Japan’s leadership was erroneously following a policy of expansion and control as a part of socio-economic politics. Japan’s administration felt cornered by the isolationist efforts by England, the US, China and Russia and thought they were running out of options on the economic arena.
We must remember when looking at this time that until recently economic growth had been based on controlling natural resources. If the technological advances of the first world war and the emerging mass production industry hadn’t already killed that concept, the Depression did.
Germany and Japan where slow to react to this change and where acting out policies of expansion that were based on pre WWI notions of economic success. The reasons for this are varied, let’s just say that in Germany one of the main reasons was that the country was governed by a man who had an altogether different ax to grind and in Japan other considerations were to be made.
Now Islam is not a nation with foreign relations. Saudi Arabia is as pointed out a tiny part any subjective division of any part of the world in any case. The one nation in the Middle Eastern sphere that has shown any expansionist tendency was smashed down with brutal force by amongst other Saudi Arabia in Desert Storm, in any case to describe Saddam as Islamist is an insult to the Muslim world.
The one organization that has struck hard at it’s perceived ideological enemy, i.e. Al Qaeda is being hunted, dismantled and hounded with the support of most nations on the globe, including Saudi Arabia.
I’ll put it another way. You, Mr(s). Ominvore are simplemindedly comparing apples and oranges and displaying a complete absence of any real understanding of history, world politics and current affairs. Retractions? Concessions? This whole thread begs for you to make them.
Sparc