HOT BLAST: Back to Nazi Germany comparisons
Nov 26, 2013 | 1550 views |  0 comments | 32 32 recommendations | email to a friend | print
Hossein Mousavian, center, former spokesman of Iran’s nuclear diplomacy team for negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency attends a panel discussion in Berlin Tuesday about the situation after the nuclear treaty deal between U.S., Iran and other world powers in Geneva, Switzerland last weekend. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)
Hossein Mousavian, center, former spokesman of Iran’s nuclear diplomacy team for negotiations with the International Atomic Energy Agency attends a panel discussion in Berlin Tuesday about the situation after the nuclear treaty deal between U.S., Iran and other world powers in Geneva, Switzerland last weekend. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)
slideshow
An editorial in today's Star takes a cautious approach to the deal on Iran's nuclear ambitions. The chances foir success are slim, but the alternatives are no more promising.

Others see it differently. Congressman Mike Rogers, R-Saks, spoke with The Star's Tim Lockette:

The nuclear deal allows Iran billions of dollars in sanctions relief — estimates range from $7 billion to $10 billion — in exchange for concession on Iran's nuclear program, including descriptions of buildings at nuclear sites and UN inspector access to those sites. 

Rogers believes Iran will take the money, but will likely cheat on the inspections regime. 

"It reaffirms their belief that we're weak and stupid," he said. 



And this Wall Street Journal column turns the dial past 11:

Britain and France's capitulation to Nazi Germany at Munich has long been a byword for ignominy, moral and diplomatic. Yet neither Neville Chamberlain nor Édouard Daladier had the public support or military wherewithal to stand up to Hitler in September 1938. Britain had just 384,000 men in its regular army; the first Spitfire aircraft only entered RAF service that summer. "Peace for our time" it was not, but at least appeasement bought the West a year to rearm.

The signing of the Paris Peace Accords in January 1973 was a betrayal of an embattled U.S. ally and the abandonment of an effort for which 58,000 American troops gave their lives. Yet it did end America's participation in a peripheral war, which neither Congress nor the public could indefinitely support. "Peace with honor" it was not, as the victims of Cambodia's Killing Fields or Vietnam's re-education camps can attest. But, for American purposes at least, it was peace.

By contrast, the interim nuclear agreement signed in Geneva on Sunday by Iran and the six big powers has many of the flaws of Munich and Paris. But it has none of their redeeming or exculpating aspects.



Comments must be made through Facebook
No personal attacks
No name-calling
No offensive language
Comments must stay on topic
No infringement of copyrighted material


Friends to Follow



Today's Events

event calendar

post a new event

Friday, April 18, 2014

Marketplace