President Bush is an appeasement president

Submitted by Steve Klein (United States), Sep 25, 2008 at 09:13

Appeasement is especially reprehensible when, like Neville Chamberlain and George W. Bush, a tiny nation-state is sacrificed in the process of appeasing the enemy.

Only days after the 9/11/2001 Muslim terror atrocities on U.S. soil, George W. Bush -- in an aggressive effort to court the favor of Saudi Arabia and other Arab states -- pledged he would work to establish a Muslim (no question, terrorist) state in the Holy Land. This followed Bush's September 20, 2001 speech before a joint session of Congress, where he vowed: "Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime....." The Palestinian Authority is of course a terrorist regime dedicated to Israel's destruction. Bush's man of peace, Mahmoud Abbas, is a Muslim terrorist. Fatah is a terrorist organization.

Ariel Sharon's initial response: "I call on the Western democracies and primarily the leader of the free world, the United States: Do not repeat the dreadful mistake of 1938 when enlightened European democracies decided to sacrifice Czechoslovakia for a convenient temporary solution. Do not try to appease the Arabs on our expense. This is unacceptable to us. Israel will not be Czechoslovakia. Israel will fight terrorism."

Sadly, Israel has indeed become Czechoslovakia. Ariel Sharon capitulated to Bush administration pressure. We are witnessing the bitter fruit of this capitulation. Consequently, the region is far more dangerous and unstable.

I am fairly confident, George W. Bush will be ranked amongst America's worst U.S. presidents by historians. I voted for Mr. Bush in 2000 to my deep regret. That the conservative movement has stood solidly by this disgraceful president redounds to the movement's eternal discredit and shame.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".