--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > In a message dated 7/13/06 8:30:44 A.M. Central Daylight Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > --- MDixon6569 wrote: > > > > I wonder if Poland ever thought war was necessary. > > The "no appeasement" camp always cites Hitler and > 1939 as the reason why we shouldn't appease aggressive > dictators, but that school of thought neglects the true > cause of World War II, which was World War I. And the > lesson of World War I was, appeasement would have > served Europe's purposes better than that war. > > Yes, and appeasement served Tibet well. Has appeasement > served Israel at all?
My point is not that appeasement is always good or bad, but rather that each situation must be evaluated on its merits. I'm not being persuaded by this reflexive tendency to say, "this situation is just like in 1939 against Hitler," because it never is. It doesn't help to cite the lessons of World War II by forgetting those of World War I. If you'd like to hold forth on the lessons of Tibet and Israel, I'm willing to read them. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
