Appeasement

Recently, lame duck President Bush compared anyone who questions his endless wars to Nazi appeasers (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080515/pl_nm/usa_politics_dc_82). "As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of 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," he said.

Because he is probably the most ignorant President this country has ever had, he surely didn't understand the irony of his comparison. Let's review Germany's invasion of Poland. Prior to the invasion, Germany signed a secret treaty with the USSR to divide up Poland. When Germany invaded Poland, they first tried to make it look as if Poland had attacked Germany; Germany's response would then be self-defense (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident). In other words, Hitler faked evidence that Poland was an imminent threat to justify his invasion and occupation of Poland.

In 1939, world leaders were smart enough to realize the evidence was faked and that Hitler was the aggressor in an unprovoked war and Britain and France soon declared war on Germany. The German people no doubt believed the SS propaganda of Poland's supposed attack, and few opposed Hitler. Today we judge the German people to have been liable for supporting the criminal actions of the madman who acted in their name and with their tacit and/or explicit approval.

In 2003, another world leader faked evidence to support an unprovoked invasion and occupation of a country that posed no threat, and divided up the invaded country with his principal ally in the war. He and his highest level advisers plotted and approved war atrocities against their enemies.

Mr. Bush, and the Republicans in general, are benefiting from the dismal knowledge of history by the American people. When judgment is due, will we claim to have just been following orders?