One can argue that the Versailles Treaty of 1919 was imposed on a defeated Germany, especially by President Wilson. Interestingly, the US did not join the war until it had been under way for nearly 2 years. The German people resented the settlement and gave Hitler the idea of the stab in the back, which he exploited to the full in mobilizing his people.

In Britain, a series of budgets had left the country defenseless and while Chamberlain must bear a great deal of the responsibility, he was not on his own. Powerful influences in the UK and the US fault they could deal with Hitler – sounds all too familiar!

The basic problem confronting the German army was that Hitler had erected a monstrous military machine to rival it in the form of the SS. Nevertheless, every German soldier from the lowest ranks to the highest swore an oath of allegiance to Der Fuhrer and there was considerable reluctance to renege on the oath and plan for overthrowing the leader. This does not excuse war crimes in any way but provides some insight into the German mentality of the time and the power exercised by Hitler.

Comment 70. typos_R_us: interested me greatly. The British did not have a tank to match anything the Germans put into the field even in 1941. In terms of aircraft, German fighters were superior to the British for quite a few years until the Brits discovered that German aircraft engines used fuel injection and not carburetors. Most models of the bf-109 were faster than the Spitfire but in turn, Britain was very short of Spitfires and the Hurricane was no match for anything except taking on the bombers and the bf-110.

One of Hitler’s worst mistakes was to declare that no new aircraft would be required to win World War II – documents show that he was quite confident with what they had, despite lacking a strategic bomber – a shortcoming that they never resolved. When the FW-190 came along, it provided a terrible shock for the RAF and the next range of British fighters used radial engines like the Focke Wulf. Once Albert Speer became the German minister for arms, the war was prolonged because of efficiencies and the attrition rate among the Luftwaffe was unsustainable but so too was that among the allies. Had the German jets been rolled out as fighters, Allied air superiority would have been overturned easily. Adolf Galland is well worth reading on the subject.

To get to the guts of the problem of appeasement with Islamic fundamentalists or jihadists, the West is collectively guilty once again of suspending their beliefs or disbeliefs. The Soviet communists never made any secret of their expansionist ideology; neither did Hitler but our elites and those with a vested interest chose to ignore the bleeding obvious. The same happened with Mao Zedong in China; Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Daniel Ortega and more recently Hugo Chavez – no one took them seriously. And we are not taking Islamic fundamentalism seriously either.

For the president of the United States to declare that he can deal with Iran and mother of elements of the Taliban ranks right up there with Jimmy Carter’s pronouncements on Iran and the Soviet Union. All Islam is militant and they argue amongst themselves only about strategies and tactics. It reeks of what Lenin said: “when the time comes to hang the capitalists, they will sell us the rope.” Now we have appeasers of every stripe, from academics to diplomats and the clergy, or telling us we must have a dialogue with Islam.

As someone experienced in counterterrorist work, I can tell you it is a dialogue of the deaf: the only thing they want to discuss are the terms of our surrender. Don’t believe any of the rubbish that is written about great strides being made against Al Qaeda and its affiliates across the world. We are losing on the home front because we extend the freedoms of democracy to our enemies. On the Middle East and Asian battlefield, we haven’t hit them hard or often enough. Time is fast running out for us and to think that Samuel Huntington died in near penury last December. He saw it all coming but it appears that no one listened then or will listen now.

“Finally, in response to the Israeli President, Shimon Peres, who so shrewdly piggybacked his own Norooz greetings to the Iranian people with that of President Obama, the Iranian President Ahmadinejad, not Ayatollah Khamene’i, should have replied: We understand very well your gesture of goodwill toward the Iranian people, hoping that they would rise up against their regime and establish a more progressive and friendly society conducive to a peaceful and constructive relationship with their neighbors and the region. Likewise, I, as well as the large Jewish community of Iran, the largest in the Middle East outside of Israel, similarly wish that the progressive, intelligent and peace-loving people of Israel would topple the radical rightwing Zionist regime that continue to bring mayhem and devastation to the region as well as to the honorable Israeli people, and replace it with peace-loving, fair and honest leaders that your ancient civilization deserves.

Needless to say, the Israeli President’s message to the Iranian people was not only a rather amateurish redundancy, it was a counterproductive gesture by a senior politician whose diplomatic skills are quickly fading with the onset of senility. To the Israeli leadership’s surprise, the White House was clearly displeased with that incidence.”

The whole article is here:

http://www.payvand.com/news/09/mar/1279.html

It is no wonder that Jewish reporter (IF right wing Jews don’t challenge his circumcision’s authenticity) Roger Cohen is smart enough to come out and write this article:

http://www.iht.com/articles/2009/03/22/opinion/edcohen.php

So in case of Israel, I now seriously question their true benefit for their own nation, and how they will be able to make their country better and acceptable. It is sad to see how the right wing there has taken over the country, just like what is happening in Iran. I always knew the DEEP HIDDEN bond between the right-wing Israel and right-wing Iranian faction. They are in it together.