Under the "politics makes strange bedfellows" I wonder if there is any behind-the-scenes support (read airbase use in emergencies) with Saudi Arabia?

To me the contrast with today vs 1938 is astounding. It is smacking you in the face if you care to look - Obama - like Chamberlain - felt that the force of his personality would calm things down - Chamberlain said (either before or after Munich) "I believe he [Hitler] is a man we can do business with".

I think the main difference between those of us on the left vs right is that the right makes decisions based on past facts - e.g., Iran's telling of her intentions; her continued research; the knowledge of some of the things they are doing are applicable only to weaponry and not peaceful use of the atom - while the left places credence - no - grasps - onto words of intention.

It was the same in 1938 as it is now.

I believe that Chamberlain died in the early 1940s during England's greatest peril - died believing that he was responsible for putting her in this position - as he - and Parliament - was.

When Hitler invaded Poland Chamberlain and his allies were incredulous that he could have lied about his intentions.

"Trust but verify" was Reagan's mantra...

Iran is banging us over the head with a 2x4 about their intentions. Obama thinks its just the unicorns and puppy dogs that fall from the sky wherever he walks.

Iran craps on Israel and Obama declares how nice they are to give away free fertilizer.

We are in so much trouble.

... but at least Chamberlain admitted his mistake and stepped down. He was repentant in retirement as well, and supported the war effort, though he died not long after he left power.

Today's "leaders" admit nothing. Look at Pelosi's horrible sideshow today, trying to get people to believe a crazy story that she protested torture tactics that she also says she didn't know about!

If, G-d forbid, Iran attacks anyone with nukes Obama and co. will absolutely blame Bush and leave it at that.

It's not just you. I believe Ahmadinejad means exactly what he says. I'm not Jewish but I'm very frightened right now.

Walt:

Ahmadinejad has done everything short of letting us into their war planning room followed by a tour of their nuclear facilities with maps containing big red arrows pointing to Tel Aviv. I've seen less subtle clues on episodes of Murder She Wrote but there are tons of people that believe the mullahs just want to sit around a campfire singing kumbaya with Netanyahu. Iran isn't foreshadowing anything - they are screaming their intentions at the top of their lungs.

The sad thing is that if Israel is attacked there will still be those that will say they deserved it for their treatment of the palestinians. And MSNBC will treat them as wise pundits instead of the anti-semites they are.

Bibi should unleash the IAF and tell Obama about it when he gets around to it.

I think we on the right tend to take people at their word while those on the left want to see "grey areas" and put their own interpretations - and then accuse the right of being "simplistic".

In 1925 Hitler published Mein Kampf. It was a blueprint for what he wanted to do. People ignored it for 14 years.

I believe Churchil was ridiculed and marginalized for believing otherwise during the 1930s.

The one thing for which one should feel some comfort is that finally some adults are in charge in Israel.

Dear Robert: Another common example of foreshadowing. Somebody has a headache in the first reel and dies of a brain tumor in the last reel.
Do you think that if, G-d forbid, Obama leaks news of an Israeli airstrike on Iran to the New York Times, it will wise up ANY liberal Jews?
Shabbat Shalom to you and Karen.

Dear Johnny: "The sad thing is that if Israel is attacked, there will still be those that will say they deserved it for their treatment of the Palestinians," you know, like providing the Palestinians with water, electricity and the best medical care in the Middle East and being ready to give them their second autonomous homeland if they would just agree to quit shooting at Jews for five minutes? Wherever these people live, Europe, the U.S., Canada, if Israel is ever, G-d forbid, destroyed, they will find themsleves under Arab attack. What will they say then?

'Obama is as clueless about the Middle East as he is about the American economy...'

Robert I tend to disagree with this statement.
In my opinion Obama is not at all naive when it comes to foreign policy. I feel that his cuddling up to Arab dictators and South American despots are very much in step with his agenda.
It seems that Obama has decided to make the US a quasi-socialistic democracy with subtle Islamic undertones.
I wouldn't at all be surprised that in the very near future many Muslim doctrines are incorporated into the American way of life.
The transformation will be innocuous at first, most likely as in Holland(no serving of pig products in public schools).

I know that it sounds very far fetched but to assume that Obama has no idea of what he is doing just because we dont agree with him is very dangerous. We should start realising that Obama is bent on Israel's acquiesence to the Arab states not only because he wants to appease the arabs but also because he most probably agrees with them.
As you have stated numerous times his affiliation with antisemites goes back for years, why do you think his actions now are out of line with his core beliefs?

Is it so politically incorrect to label a man an antisemite (who was educated as a Muslim, then had a 20 year affiliation in an antisemetic church) just because he is the President of the United States?

Bill Brandt..."mein kampf"...when this book was first published in Britain, the publisher--bowing to pressure from the German embassy--excised some of the more extreme and incendiary passages. Katherine, Duchess of Atholl, read the book in the original German and provide Churchill with the correct translation, together with a summary of the passages that had been excised or watered down.

There is a parallel in the behavior of today's media, who so often fail to accurately report the true words of people like Ahmadinejad. We need a hundred thousand Kitty Atholls to speak the truth.

We really are seeing 1938 again. It's frightening.

Commentary on this excellent post can be read here.

Miranda:

Jews are already getting attacked around the world because Europe and Asia are afraid of making their muslim population mad. Look at all the places where the mohammed cartoons were reprinted. And where is the outrage when Sderot comes under mortar or rocket attack.

The Jews are the canaries in coal mines when it comes to religious freedoms. As a Catholic, I know that if a country allows their Jewish population to be targeted Christians and Hindus and Mormons are next. Conversely if a country allows their Jewish population to practice their religion I will be free as well. There are no countries where Christians are attacked that didn't first persecute Jews. Freedom of religion is a basic human right but the left could care less about it for the Jews.

Liberals love to talk about the importance of diversity but where are they when it comes to the Jewish "settlements"? They are perfectly happy having Jew-free areas of the world if it will make muslims happy. And that is why Robert is 100% correct when he says those opposing Israel are anti-semites.

Dear Mr. Foster: Thank you for posting that information about the Duchess of Atholl. George Orwell refers to her quite often, mainly as a sucker for Commie propaganda.

Dear Gregg: DO they ban pork products from public schools in Holland? I understand that some schools, in the U.S., forbid children to bring peanut butter sandwiches to school, IN THEIR OWN LUNCHBOXES, because some other child might be alergic to peanuts.

Miranda...thanks for the note. In 1945, Atholl asked Orwell to support her League for European Freedom, which was protesting Communist takeovers and atrocities in Eastern Europe. Here's Orwell's response:

"I cannot associate myself with an essentially Conservative body which claims to defend democracy in Europe but has nothing to say about British imperialism. [O]ne can only denounce the crimes now being committed in Poland, Jugoslavia etc. if one is equally insistent on ending Britain's unwanted rule in India. I belong to the Left and must work inside it, much as I hate Russian totalitarianism and its poisonous influence..."

Do you perchance remember in which work(s) Orwell called her a sucker for Communist propaganda?

Given her published denunciations of Communism in the 1920s and her anti-Communist work in the late 1940s and beyond, it seems pretty clear to me that her appearances with Communists re the Spanish Civil War were purely tactical, along the lines of let's-worry-about-the-greatest-threat-first.

Miranda refer to this link.
http://barenakedislam.wordpress.com/2008/12/19/european-backlash-against-muslims/
(BELGIUM: How Islam has corrupted the schools.)

BTW the banning of nuts for severe medicinal consequences can't be compared to the Islamification of a Democratic nation!!

Dear Mr. Foster: In The Collected Eassays, Journalism and Letters of George Orwell, Volume 1, An Age Like This 1920-1940, edited by Sonia Orwell and Ian Angus, Penguin : Hammondsworth, 1968, on pages 381-384, in his review of the Duchess's book Searchlight on Spain, Orwell wrote (page 381) "There is, of course, nothing surprising nowadays in a pro-Communist Duchess. Nearly all moneyed people who enter the left-wing movement follow the 'Stalinist' line as a matter of course."
In Volume 3 of the same series, As I Please 1943-1945, also edited by Sonia Orwell and Ian Angus, also Penguin : Hammondsworth, 1968,in "As I Please," pages 368-372, discussing a meeting of the League for European Freedom, Orwell wrote (page 370) "It is only about seven years since the Duchess-'The Red Duchess' as she was affectionately nicknamed-was the pet of the Daily Worker and lent the considerable weight of her authority to every lie that the Communists happened to be uttering at the moment."

Dear Gregg: There have always been children with allergies. I don't see the point of BANNING peanut butter sandwiches, of saying 499 children can't bring peanut butter because ONE child is allergic to peanuts. Some children are lactose intolerant-are you going to ban milk? An old friend of my mother's is very allergic to clams; had he, as a small boy, been attending your school, would you have said "No child can bring a thermos of Campbell's clam chowder in his lunchbox?"

Don't know if you've heard of Harry Turtledove. He is a prolific sci-fi writer, mostly the "What If?" kind. One of his stories, can't remember the title, but the plot was Gandhi versus the Nazis.

It was a very short story.

Bitter:

Sounds like a brilliant very short story.