March 5, 2014
Netanyahu's inaction to Obama's provocations sends powerful message
Kerry, after apparent criticism by Schumer, seeks to allay skepticism on diplomacy
How to ruin a perfectly good kid in 10 simple steps
2014 Oscars played it safe, but was faith lost in the shuffle?
Apple joins Hobby Lobby in touting corporate values beyond profit
March 3, 2014
Alina Dain Sharon: In the Hebrew calendar, a leap year has extra month, not day
Latest Obama appointment to prove Prez set on emasculating so-called Israel Lobby
Jewish World Review
Sept. 5, 2008
/ 5 Elul 5768
Whadda ya know, it's appeasement Joe
Besides being a blowhard, a proven plagiarist, an alleged crook and full-time party-hack attack dog, it now seems that Joe Biden has shown himself to be Obama's official Vice Appeaser when it comes to dealing with the world's evil empires. To that end, he will be the perfect compliment to Appeaser-in-Chief Barak Obama, should Obama get elected, God forbid. Biden told Israeli officials that they need to accept the idea Iran will acquire nuclear weapons.
Israel's Army Radio reported this week details of a "behind closed doors" meeting that Biden, as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, had with Israeli officials a few years ago. He told them that diplomacy and sanctions would be futile against Iran. Biden went on to say that he opposed "opening an additional military and diplomatic front" against Iran.
"Israel will have to reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran," Army Radio quoted Biden as telling the Israelis. In other words, "Oh well, you Israelis will just have to deal with annihilation! Hey, get over it, okay?" This is far worse than simply appeasement of Iran, this is throwing our friends under the bus, or rather the speeding train.
Least we forget, Iran's president Ahmadinejad has stated that he will wipe Israel off the map, making clear his use of weapons of mass destruction against the Jewish state. So you can bet that Obama's pick has not given the Israeli's any great confidence in what an Obama presidency would mean for them should they get into office.
Remember, Obama has said that he believed in direct negotiations with Iran. He thinks that sitting down at a table over croissants, or whatever the hell they eat in Iran, is the way to deal with people who proudly state loud and clear their intentions of obliterating an entire race of people. Yes, by all means, let's negotiate with insane imams who want to slit our throats. And just how do you "negotiate" that? Okay, we'll allow you to slit the throats of just HALF of the population?
That great appeaser, Neville Chamberlain said "Peace in our time" after he "negotiated" with Hitler. Obama's slogan might be something like, "Appeasement we can believe in."
Another American put the issue of appeasement this way: "Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us they have a utopian solution of peace without victory. They call their policy "accommodation." And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us. All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers. They say we offer simple answers to complex problems. Well, perhaps there is a simple answer not an easy answer but simple: If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right.
"Alexander Hamilton said, "A nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master, and deserves one." Now let's set the record straight. There's no argument over the choice between peace and war, but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace and you can have it in the next second surrender.
"Admittedly, there's a risk in any course we follow other than this, but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement, and this is the specter our well-meaning liberal friends refuse to face that their policy of accommodation is appeasement, and it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender.
"If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand the ultimatum. You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, "There is a price we will not pay." There is a point beyond which they must not advance."
The American who said those words was Ronald Reagan. It was a major part of his "A Time for Choosing" speech in October 1964.
Forty-four years ago Reagan understood. He got it. In this election year John McCain gets it. Sarah Palin gets it. The Obama team just doesn't get it - they never will. But one thing is for sure - Israel will get it but good if Iran remains unbridled.
Joe Biden tells Israel that diplomacy and sanctions would be futile against Iran. I happen to agree with that. But when he goes on to say that he would not use military force to stop Iran in their development of nuclear weapons and that "Israel must reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran," then he is basically telling Israel to put their head down between their legs, say a little prayer, and drop dead. Way to go, Joe.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in the media and Washington consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
JWR contributor Greg Crosby, former creative head for Walt Disney publications, has written thousands of comics, hundreds of children's books, dozens of essays, and a letter to his congressman. A freelance writer in Southern California, you may contact him by clicking here.
Greg Crosby Archives
© 2006, Greg Crosby