Sun, 25/Feb/2018 12:13


I often see parents give in to their kids, just to shut the kid up. This happens in the grocery store and the kid gets a piece of candy or some of the sort. Or maybe this happens when the parent is trying to talk with another adult. Are we encouraging this behavior? The thought process from the child's point of view may be "I screamed and I got candy. Will it work again?!"

The child learns this pattern: doing something against the will of the parent and getting rewarded. It is no small wonder that as the child grows to be a teenager they act out again and again pushing the boundaries and wanting to get rewarded.

The action of appeasement has never been successful. Well, it is usually successful in the short term but in the long term it leads often to tragic results. Perhaps the most infamous appeaser is Neville Chamberlain. He was the Prime Minister of Great Britain in the latter portion of the 1930's. This was the time when Adolf Hitler, under the guise of protecting ethnic Germans in other countries, began to annex countries such as what was not too long ago called Czechoslovakia. Chamberlain signed the Munich agreement which essentially told Hitler "if you act out, I'll give you a lolly pop". What do you think Hitler (and the rest of the world) learned? Did Hitler stop there or did he do it again? How did and do the Czeck's view this agreement?

President Kennedy did the same with the Soviet Union and its leader Nikita Khrushchev. The Soviet Union was doomed to collapse unless it continuously took new territory with more people to tax (in more ways than with money) and more natural resources to pillage. He wanted us to help him and by threating us guiled us into helping them. He threatened to put nuclear missiles in Cuba. Kennedy formed a blockade. Both sides knew this would not be good and backed down. To encourage the Soviet Union from doing this again, our President gave them technology and sold them grain at reduced prices. What do you think the Soviets did each time they needed more food or money later? Successive U.S. Presidents continued this appeasement until Reagan. By not selling the Soviet Union grain or worse simply giving them food, he forced them to collapse.

Sadam Hussein was a student of history and we appeased him. The Iranians want nukes and they think they can get them if they act out enough. Our government has already said, "OK, OK, you can have nuclear power, just not the bomb, if you promise to stop saying bad things about us." That is almost literal.

Vladimir Putin does the same thing to get us to agree not put up the missile defense shield over eastern Europe. What does he have against it? It is purely defensive, designed to stop them from attacking first. So, he says he will not talk to Iran and North Korea if we put it up. Put the Missile Defense Shield up!!!

North Korea is the same old story all over again. For conterfeiting our money, firing missiles over the Sea of Japan and possibly threatening Hawaii we give them food and real money. Why?

Someone please tell me why we continue down this road of lunacy with continual appeasement.


Leave a Reply

(Your email will not be publicly displayed.)

Captcha Code

Click the image to see another captcha.