Opinion

Tuesday, Nov 03 2009 10:10 PM

Appeasement danger

The difference between diplomacy and appeasement can be a fine line when dealing with potential enemy nations or terrorists.

The British learned the hard way when, on Sept. 30, 1938, Britain's Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, bowing to Adolf Hitler's deception, had departed with a mutual smile and a handshake -- and a signed agreement, allowing Germany certain concessions but not war with Britain. The British public was already feeling the distant drumbeat of another war. They sighed with relief and roared with approval at the news -- but not for long.

Soon thereafter, the Nazis marched across parts of Europe with little resistance. Then German bombs fell over London. But, as Hitler had feared, the British fought back (the rest is history.)

Winston Churchill described the folly of appeasement as "feeding the crocodile in the hope you'll be the last one eaten."

J.B. SELVIDGE

Buttonwillow

My Yahoo Print

Advertisement

Hot Topics: Popular stories from The Californian's Opinion section

Most commented stories from the opinion sections

  1. KATIE PRICE: We're finding the courage to address bullying in our schools (3)

    Sam came in to my office in tears. I'd never met this freshman before, but I could tell there was something terribly wrong. As I gently prodded him to tell me what was bothering him, he began rocking back and forth, wracked in sobs.

  2. OUR VIEW: Supervisors' HSR vote is premature (2)
  3. SOUNDING BOARD: Presidential morality counts, but how much? (1)
  4. OUR VIEW: Republicans must shore up support, not try for redo (1)