În engleză îi spune appeasement. În română s-ar traduce prin împăciutorism. Înseamnă a face compromisuri cu duşmani implacabili în speranţa că aceştia vor renunţa la intenţia de a te distruge. Mai mult de atît, înseamnă a face compromisuri după compromisuri, într-un şir nesfîrşit, indiferent de insuccesul compromisurilor anterioare şi de a insista că aceasta e singura modalitate validă şi eficace de a menţine pacea. Această politică şi-a dovedit din plin eficacitatea şi validitatea în faţa lui Hitler şi Mussolini. Aceeaşi politică este practicată şi de elitele din prezent în faţa unor adversari implacabili ca Hamas, Ahmadinejad, Putin şi Coreea de Nord.
Caroline Glick face o sinteză, în piesa propusă spre lectură, a acestei politici falimentare azi adăpostită sub eufemismul „diplomaţie realistă”. O notă personală: repetăm cu insistenţă şi magnificăm greşelile anilor ’30. Rezultatul va fi şi el pe măsura trecutului, dar de asemenea magnificat. Iran va avea arma nucleară în doi sau trei ani cel mult. Întrebarea ipotetică „ce s-ar fi întîmplat dacă Hitler ar fi reuşit să obţină bomba atomică” îşi va cunoaşte răspunsul. Hitler nu a avut suficient timp la dispoziţie, în rest a avut tot ce-i trebuia. Mulahii de la Teheran au învăţat din ghinionului eroului a cărui operă vor să o desăvîrşească şi înţeleg ca principalul lor capital este timpul… oferit din plin de „realismul” Vestului.
Romanian
14 comentarii
Manjusri
4 ianuarie 2009Tuturor celor de pe blog va spun la multi ani! Sa fiti sanatosi si veseli! ????
Dl. Catalin Avramescu are un articol interesant referitor la extremismul islamic, nazism, antisemitism si legaturile dintre acestea. Articolul se intituleaza „Revolutia antisemita” si a aparut in „22”. Link-ul este acesta: http://www.revista22.ro/revolu…..-1392.html
emil
4 ianuarie 2009Multumim mult pentru urari si articol. Un an bun si sanatate si tie!
israelianca
4 ianuarie 2009La multi ani, Manjusri!
israelianca
4 ianuarie 2009Manjusri, multumesc pentru link. Articolul e intr-adevar foarte bun, dar am o mica observatie: antisemitismul din lumea musulmana este mult mai vechi decit sustine autorul. El incepe chiar din koran si se datoreaza faptului ca evreii care locuiau la Mecca si Medina au refuzat sa imbratiseze islamul. E un link pe site-ul asta catre ziarul Muresul, daca nu ma insel, unde se analizeaza antisemitismul koranului. Dar e adevarat ca miscarea sionista si infiintarea Statului Israel au facut sa creasca substantial tensiunea arteriala a arabilor si musulmanilor care nu pot intelege de ce urmasii procilor si ai maimutelor ar vrea sa se autoguverneze.
Manjusri
4 ianuarie 2009Asa e, antisemitismul in lumea musulmana provine din Coran. Articolul mi se pare foarte bun in primul rand pentru ca releva legaturile dintre antisemitism, extremism islamic si nazism.
israelianca
4 ianuarie 2009Articolul este excelent si binevenit. ????
Francesco
4 ianuarie 2009Ziarul de Mures citeaza din Coran:
Iata cum s-a demonstrat in Indonezia si ce fel de portrete ale evreilor s-au plimbat prin piata si pe strazi.
Am repostat comentariul 60 de la de la „Good morning Gaza 2” pentru a sublinia legatura dintre anti-semitism si Coran. Indonezienii musulmani nu au avut niciodata de-a face cu evreii, nu au avut nici un razboi cu ei, nici un fel de subjugare sau disputa nu poate fi invocata in sprijinul imaginarului negativ care provine direct din Coran.
israelianca
4 ianuarie 2009Grazie, Francesco!
costin
4 ianuarie 2009La multi ani Manjusri! ????
Francesco
4 ianuarie 2009Articolul din Ziarul de Mures mai arata urmatoarele:
Panseluta
4 ianuarie 2009Majusri:
La multi ani si tie!
Nimic nu te ilumineaza mai bine despre natura Islamului decit o lectura a Coranului, chiar si partiala. Stiu oameni care n-au putut trece de „Vaca”, prima sura, de scirba.
Panseluta
4 ianuarie 2009Manjusri:
Iarta-ma ca ti-am pocit numele.
Numai bine si tie si celor dragi in noul an.
Manjusri
4 ianuarie 2009Panseluta:
Stai linistita, nu-i nici un bai. ???? Sa dea Dumnezeu sa avem cu totii un an bun!
bugsy
4 ianuarie 2009Cautand in arhiva personala articole din timpul am dat si peste acest editorial publicat in DIE WELT. Subiectul este…. appeasement!
Cowards in Europe
Friday, 28. July 2006, 10:31:18
Subject: A GERMAN EDITORIAL
Some in Europe get it.
If any of you still feel that this war on terror is a mistake, here is an opinion from an unexpected source. It’s fascinating that this should come out of Europe. Mathias Dopfner, Chief Executive of the huge German publisher Axel Springer AG, has written a blistering attack in DIE WELT, Germany’s largest daily paper, against the timid reaction of Europe in the face of the Islamic threat. This is a must-read by all Americans. History may well certify its correctness.
EUROPE – THY NAME IS COWARDICE
Commentary by Mathias Dopfner CEO, Axel Springer, AG
A few days ago Henry Broder wrote in Welt am Sonntag, „Europe – your family name is appeasement.” It’s a phrase you can’t get out of your head because it’s so terribly true. Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives, as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to toothless agreements.
Appeasement legitimized and stabilized Communism in the Soviet Union, then East Germany, then all the rest of Eastern Europe, where for decades, inhuman suppressive, murderous governments were glorified as the ideologically correct alternative to all other possibilities. Appeasement crippled Europe when genocide ran rampant in Kosovo, and even though we had absolute proof of ongoing mass-murder, we Europeans debated and debated and debated, and were still debating when finally the Americans had to come from halfway around the world, into Europe yet again, and do our work for us.
Rather than protecting democracy in the Middle East, European Appeasement, camouflaged behind the fuzzy word „equidistance,” now countenances suicide bombings in Israel by fundamentalist Palestinians.
Appeasement generates a mentality that allows Europe to ignore nearly 500,000 victims of Saddam’s torture and murder machinery and, motivated by the self-righteousness of the peace movement, has the gall to issue bad grades to George Bush… Even as it is uncovered that the loudest critics of the American action in Iraq made illicit billions, no, TENS of billions, in the corrupt U.N. Oil-for-Food program.
And now we are faced with a particularly grotesque form of appeasement. How is Germany reacting to the escalating violence by Islamic Fundamentalists in Holland and elsewhere? By suggesting that we really should have a „Muslim Holiday” in Germany?, but I am not. A substantial fraction of our (German) Government, and if the polls are to be believed, the German people, actually believe that creating an Official State „Muslim Holiday” will somehow spare us from the wrath of the fanatical Islamists. One cannot help but recall Britain’s Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolph Hitler and declaring European „Peace in our time”.
What else has to happen before the European public and its political leadership get it? There is a sort of crusade underway, an especially perfidious crusade consisting of systematic attacks by fanatic Muslims, focused on civilians, directed against our free, open Western societies, and intent upon Western Civilization’s utter destruction. It is a conflict that will most likely last longer than any of the great military conflicts of the last century – a conflict conducted by an enemy that cannot be tamed by „tolerance” and „accommodation” but is actually spurred on by such gestures, which have proven to be, and will always be taken by the Islamists for signs of weakness. Only two recent American Presidents had the courage needed for Anti-appeasement: Reagan and Bush.
His American critics may quibble over the details, but we Europeans know the truth. We saw it first hand: Ronald Reagan ended the Cold War, freeing half of the German people from nearly 50 years of terror and virtual slavery. And Bush, supported only by the Social Democrat Blair, acting on moral conviction, recognized the danger in the Islamic War against Democracy. His place in history will have to be evaluated after a number of years have passed.
In the meantime, Europe sits back with charismatic self-confidence in the multicultural corner, instead of defending liberal society’s values and being an attractive center of power on the same playing field as the true great powers, America and China. On the contrary – we Europeans present ourselves, in contrast to those „arrogant Americans”, as the World Champions of „tolerance”, which even (Germany’s Interior Minister) Otto Schily justifiably criticizes. Why? Because we’re so moral? I fear it’s more because we’re so materialistic, so devoid of a moral compass.
For his policies, Bush risks the fall of the dollar, huge amounts of additional national debt, and a massive and persistent burden on the American economy – because unlike almost all of Europe, Bush realizes what is at stake – literally everything. While we criticize the „capitalistic robber barons” of America because they seem too sure of their priorities, we timidly defend our Social Welfare systems. Stay out of it! It could get expensive! We’d rather discuss reducing our 35-hour workweek or our dental coverage, or our 4 weeks of paid vacation… Or listen to TV pastors preach about the need to „reach out to terrorists. To understand and forgive”.
These days, Europe reminds me of an old woman who, with shaking hands, frantically hides her last pieces of jewelry when she notices a robber breaking into a neighbor’s house. Appeasement? Europe, thy name is Cowardice. —God Bless America—