Who is a bigger appeaser?

[99percenter]

Trump pals around with terrorists and dictators like Putin, Kim jong un, and Mohammad Bin Salman. Will he surpass Neville chamberlain as the biggest appeaser in world history?

 

[TurtleDude]

silly poll options. Political hackery.

 

[Common Sense 1]

Other than your run of the mill President Trump haters no one will give a whit about this poll.
It was much more exciting when we had polls about Russian collusion. eace

 

[99percenter]

Other than your run of the mill President Trump haters no one will give a whit about this poll.
It was much more exciting when we had polls about Russian collusion. eace

You obviously did enough to click and post in it.

 

[Phys251]

Trump pals around with terrorists and dictators like Putin, Kim jong un, and Mohammad Bin Salman. Will he surpass Neville chamberlain as the biggest appeaser in world history?

Too early to tell. Assuming we survive all this, we'll know more in 5-10 years.

 

[TurtleDude]

Trump pals around with terrorists and dictators like Putin, Kim jong un, and Mohammad Bin Salman. Will he surpass Neville chamberlain as the biggest appeaser in world history?

didn't you claim to be a Trump supporter? so are you going to try to answer this silly poll twice? a vote for each choice?

 

[uptower]

I'd have to say Chamberlain.

For those who don't understand the term or the historical context, the term 'appeaser' is a loaded insult, so it's not much use in the wrong hands.

Yet there is an underlying truth to it. Appeasing an enemy is pursuing a policy giving him at least some of what he wants in the hope that he won't ask for more, that it will avoid conflict or that it may somehow benefit one's own country in the short or long term. It didn't work for Chamberlain for a number of reasons: when dealing with acquisitive dictators it rarely does. There's a question of whether he had a choice or made the right one at the time, but there is no question he did it for his country.

Now Trump is not making any of these political calculations. He's simply playing nice to someone he sees as a personal sponsor in order to maintain sweet business deals for himself, or possibly hide compromising information about himself. He's even doing so in contravention of his country's stated policy which as of this moment is condemnation of said sponsor's actions. He's not doing it for his country, in fact he is going against his country's interests in favour of a foreign power. Appeasement is not the word for that. There is another.

 

[99percenter]

I'd have to say Chamberlain

For those who don't understand the term or the historical context, the term 'appeaser' is a loaded insult, so it's not much use in the wrong hands.

Yet there is an underlying truth to it. Appeasing an enemy is pursuing a policy giving him at least some of what he wants in the hope that he won't ask for more, that it will avoid conflict or that it may somehow benefit one's own country in the short or long term. It didn't work for Chamberlain for a number of reasons: when dealing with acquisitive dictators it rarely does. There's a question of whether he had a choice or made the right one at the time, but there is no question he did it for his country.

Now Trump is not making any of these political calculations. He's simply playing nice to someone he sees as a personal sponsor in order to maintain sweet business deals for himself, or possibly hide compromising information about himself. He's even doing so in contravention of his country's stated policy which as of this moment is condemnation of said sponsor's actions. He's not doing it for his country, in fact he is going against his country's interests in favour of a foreign power. Appeasement is not the word for that. There is another.

Treason?

 

[haymarket]

I'd have to say Chamberlain.

For those who don't understand the term or the historical context, the term 'appeaser' is a loaded insult, so it's not much use in the wrong hands.

Yet there is an underlying truth to it. Appeasing an enemy is pursuing a policy giving him at least some of what he wants in the hope that he won't ask for more, that it will avoid conflict or that it may somehow benefit one's own country in the short or long term. It didn't work for Chamberlain for a number of reasons: when dealing with acquisitive dictators it rarely does. There's a question of whether he had a choice or made the right one at the time, but there is no question he did it for his country.

Now Trump is not making any of these political calculations. He's simply playing nice to someone he sees as a personal sponsor in order to maintain sweet business deals for himself, or possibly hide compromising information about himself. He's even doing so in contravention of his country's stated policy which as of this moment is condemnation of said sponsor's actions. He's not doing it for his country, in fact he is going against his country's interests in favour of a foreign power. Appeasement is not the word for that. There is another.

Very well said.

The John Birch Society back in the day used to push a book called NONE DARE CALL IT TREASON. Today, we dare.

 

[Mycroft]

Now Trump is not making any of these political calculations. He's simply playing nice to someone he sees as a personal sponsor in order to maintain sweet business deals for himself, or possibly hide compromising information about himself. He's even doing so in contravention of his country's stated policy which as of this moment is condemnation of said sponsor's actions. He's not doing it for his country, in fact he is going against his country's interests in favour of a foreign power. Appeasement is not the word for that. There is another.

You did fine talking about reality until you got to this part. Then you dove head first into your own alternate reality.

Too bad.

 

[Xelor]

Trump pals around with terrorists and dictators like Putin, Kim jong un, and Mohammad Bin Salman. Will he surpass Neville chamberlain as the biggest appeaser in world history?

Has Neville Chamberlain been officially recognized by a preponderance of historians as "the biggest appeaser in world history?" I really don't know. Be that as it may and assuming historians have largely agreed thus, unless Trump's "chuminess" and delusions derived from it leads to a world war, probably not.

 

[WCH]

Where's Barry?

 

[99percenter]

didn't you claim to be a Trump supporter? so are you going to try to answer this silly poll twice? a vote for each choice?

I thought he was the anti Bush candidate but he turned out to be Bush 2.0. A coward that is spending our country in to ruins, destroying the economy and surrendering to our enemies.

 

[99percenter]

Where's Barry?

Probably enjoying his defeat of obl.

 

[WCH]

Probably enjoying his defeat of obl.

In his immortal words, "You didn't built that"

 

[WCH]

I thought he was the anti Bush candidate but he turned out to be Bush 2.0. A coward that is spending our country in to ruins, destroying the economy and surrendering to our enemies.

Pardon me but, that's just a load of crap.

 

[uptower]

You did fine talking about reality until you got to this part. Then you dove head first into your own alternate reality.

Too bad.

The fact is the only reason (and that may or may no be spelled with a 't') for Trump to be so forgiving of the saudis and in particular MBS is there's something in it for him. He's harder on Merkel, May and Macron for Chrissakes.

 

[Moderate Right]

Trump pals around with terrorists and dictators like Putin, Kim jong un, and Mohammad Bin Salman. Will he surpass Neville chamberlain as the biggest appeaser in world history?

LOL. He's got a long way to go just to catch up with Obama.

 

[Moderate Right]

Too early to tell. Assuming we survive all this, we'll know more in 5-10 years.

You mean after Trump's second term is over? Bout time you guys got realistic.

 

[99percenter]

LOL. He's got a long way to go just to catch up with Obama.

 

[Abbazorkzog]

I thought he was the anti Bush candidate but he turned out to be Bush 2.0. A coward that is spending our country in to ruins, destroying the economy and surrendering to our enemies.

Has Trump gotten hundreds of thousands of innocent people killed in an illegal, internationally-condemned war based on lies yet?

 

[Phys251]

You mean after Trump's second term is over? Bout time you guys got realistic.

2018 + 5 = 2023. Nice try.