Appeaser should be banned from nations' top office

The Basilica of Barack (his campaign website) says:

"Obama has always said that he is willing to meet with appropriate Iranian leaders at the appropriate time after due preparation and advance work by US diplomats. That's what he said last summer, and that's what he's said throughout the campaign. Preparation is not a precondition it is absolutely necessary to the success of any diplomatic effort. You need to build an agenda and open lines of communication, just as we would do with any country, But Barack Obama believes we must be willing to lead, just like Kennedy did, and just like Reagan did. And that's what he will do as president."

In July, 2007, the Obamamessiah stated his intentions: [nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Oj7Jn9rv4"]YouTube - Obama / Clinton on meeting anti-US leaders[/nomedia]

Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.” President George W. Bush

Over the past three and a half decades America has tried negotiations with the Axis of Evil on several occasions.

Every negotiation, every ceasefire, ended when the terrorists broke faith.

How successful has this tactic been?

What chance of success will appeasement have if our enemies know we will cut n' run at the first sign of blood?
 
Last edited:
That would have meant banning George W from the White House (not a bad idea).
 
I'm convinced at this point that the word "appeasement" is not in the conservative dictionary.

None of them know what it means.
 
Lets see if this draws them a good enough picture. Chamberlin MEETING with Hitler does not equal appeasement. Chamberlin GIVING Hitler the Sudetenland for peace in our time equals appeasment. The meeting with and talking to are not the appeasement part. Kids in 11th grade history classes can explain this to you.
 
Actually, the main thing I was thinking about when I said George W. shouldn't be allowed in the white house was his dealings with Saudi Arabia.

More support and more funding for the 9/11/01 attacks came from Saudi Arabia than anywhere else. In fact, more came from Saudi than the rest of the support and finances combined.

And yet, when George said "you are either with us or against us", he made an exception for them and has made no attempts to punish or even question the Saudis.

I'd call that appeasement.
 
"Obama will immediately begin to remove our troops from Iraq. He will remove one to two combat brigades each month, and have all of our combat brigades out of Iraq within 16 months."

http://www.barackobama.com/issues/iraq/

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad already knows that Barack will cut n' run, so what will Golden Boy say to him to convince him to play nice?
 
I am going to vote for Obama because I think he is better or less bad than the opposition.
My voting for the guy does not mean I think he agrees with me on everything. Nor am I an obama supporter per sie.

He is a politician, anyone who worships a politician gets what they deserve.
 
I'm convinced at this point that the word "appeasement" is not in the conservative dictionary.

None of them know what it means.

Damn...thats good....you're half right....its not in the Conservative dictionary....
because....WE DO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IS MEANS...:readit:
 
Back
Top