Europe, thy name is Cowardice.

[scribblet]

I checked up on this German editorial floating around the internet...Snopes says it is TRUE...check it out on: http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/dapfner.asp This is opinion from an unexpected source and fascinating that this should come out of Europe . So I'm posting it as I think its worth the read, it was in an email so no link.

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 ?

I wish I were joking, 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.

[sharkman]

Wow, powerful stuff. Perhaps it is too late for Europe. They can't change the course they are on with the immigration levels they have. They must appease and hope for the best.

[Wilber]

I have to wonder what our attitude would be if we had seen tens of millions of our citizens killed and our countries devastated by two wars in the space of slightly more than 30 years. Doesn't justify anything but I wonder.

[Figleaf]

EUROPE - THY NAME IS COWARDICE

(Commentary by Mathias Dopfner CEO, Axel Springer, AG)

...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.

So, let's blame England and France for Hitler, is that the message here?

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.

Yes, the west should have sacrificed millions more of our people to 'liberate' populations who wouldn't stand up for themselves. This is offensive. If the west 'appeased' communism, isn't it even more true to point out that the populations of communist countries acquiesced? And would have served in the armies that the west would have had to fight to end communism.

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.

I'd be really interested in seeing any law, policy, or agreement whereby European governments are 'countenancing' suicide bombings. Failing that, we can just chalk this comment up as an absurd lie.

One cannot help but recall Britain 's Neville Chamberlain waving the laughable treaty signed by Adolph Hitler and declaring European "Peace in our time".

OMG! He said 'Chamberlain'!!! Unleash the Tory Attack Dogs!!!

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.

There's only one thing to do. Beat them to the punch!

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...

He doesn't merely 'risk' it. He has brought it about.

[sharkman]

England and France are not being blamed for hitler, but for waiting too long to oppose him. By the time Hitler grabbed Poland, it was too late.

[Wilber]

England and France are not being blamed for hitler, but for waiting too long to oppose him. By the time Hitler grabbed Poland, it was too late.

Again, only 21 years after the most destructive war in history had just ended with a cost of over 2 million dead to those two countries. It is it any wonder they wanted desperately to avoid another. It was a bad strategy but totaly understandable.

[sharkman]

Avoiding another would have meant nipping Hitler in the bud. Churchill saw it, but was ignored by appeasers. at any rate, what about today's appeasers? They have nothing to do with WWII.

[Wilber]

Avoiding another would have meant nipping Hitler in the bud. Churchill saw it, but was ignored by appeasers. at any rate, what about today's appeasers? They have nothing to do with WWII.

Don't know that they do but I didn't bring up the analogy

[Guthrie]

Mathias Döpfner sits on the board of Time-Warner --- the same magazine who dropped Dubya from the list of top 100 most influential people

does that add to their credibility or take away from his?

[sharkman]

I wonder what the next decade holds for Europe. You can only bend over so far before you fall over. They are in the grip of the UN and the Muslim minority.

[bush_cheney2004]

Ahhh...what a lovely read time and time again....thanks scriblett!

[AshNazg]

Ever consider that maybe Europe is simply tired of all the bloodshed?

They have been spilling each others blood for two thousand years before North America was even colonized. At some point you get tired of it and you want to evolve beyond that.

Its a pity their neighbors don't feel the same way, but thats when you call the American muscle instead of getting your own hands dirty.

[sharkman]

But take a look at the middle east, they've been at it at one form or another for a lot longer, yet they don't seem to allow tiredness to sway them.

[AshNazg]

But take a look at the middle east, they've been at it at one form or another for a lot longer, yet they don't seem to allow tiredness to sway them.

I guess one would have to unwaveringly believe in the afterlife in order to throw ones life away so willingly.

That, or the living conditions in the ME are so bad that even death seems to be a reprieve.

Secular, fat Europe on the other hand sees no such reasons to risk their lives

[Wilber]

Secular, fat Europe on the other hand sees no such reasons to risk their lives

Considering the latest polls on Afghanistan, the same could be said for most Canadians.

[noahbody]

because unlike almost all of Europe , Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything.

Bush may realize there are dangerous situtations in the world, but he lacks the wisdom to understand them. I'd suggest the one area that is truly a danger is Iran, due to its instability, radicalism and pursuit of nucular power. But thanks to Iraq, the world is damned if it acts, damned if it doesn't.

[marcinmoka]

because unlike almost all of Europe , Bush realizes what is at stake - literally everything.

I would say that Bush recognizes what is at stake, which is, literally everything, but sadly remains lost in how to achieve the desired ends.

The Europeans kinda acknowledge the problem, but are two anti American to full admit it. Though parts of their camp at least know how NOT to get there.

If we can only get the two to agree, that is a massive step forward (and one which Sakozy will be instrumental in overcoming).

Our nations constitute NATO, and that is our only way forward.

[jbg]

Wow, powerful stuff. Perhaps it is too late for Europe. They can't change the course they are on with the immigration levels they have. They must appease and hope for the best.

Not so fast. Europe's pattern, with newcomers, is to appease and allow, and then turn in a vicious, bloody manner. That's how the Nazi holocaust came about. The Jews (far less of a threat than the Muslims) were, in varying degrees, tolerated, scorned or welcomed in different countries at different times. When Jews rapidly appeared in civil and business leadership position with the beginnings of official nondiscrimination in the 1800's it scared the bedrutthers out of many Europeans.

The same appeasement instincts led them to accept Hitler as a savior. In other words Europeans are happy to let happen whatever happens, as long as someone else does the dirty work.

[margrace]

England and France are not being blamed for hitler, but for waiting too long to oppose him. By the time Hitler grabbed Poland, it was too late.

The first world war was horrendous, the cost to Europe was horrendous, if we were looking at the same thing over again,as they were, would we be so quick to jump in. I think not, it is easy for us in North America to judge but if you haven't walked in another's shoes you cannot know what motivates them.

[marcinmoka]

Not so fast. Europe's pattern, with newcomers, is to appease and allow, and then turn in a vicious, bloody manner.

I'm just curious as to the basis of this theory. By pattern this would imply numerous instances of appeasement-aggression towards a multitude of "new-comers", and over the same time frame, this appeasement-aggression did not surface in the U.S, but both did appease and turn in a vicious manner, difference is America did not see birth to a Hitler (although the anti-black sentiment was...and is....notable, but not as systematic), but this would hardly constitute a pattern, nor an acceptance as a Saviour by the whole of the population.

[Jerry Galinda]

“you cannot know what motivates them”

It was the „policy of ostrich”.

[jbg]

Not so fast. Europe's pattern, with newcomers, is to appease and allow, and then turn in a vicious, bloody manner.

I'm just curious as to the basis of this theory. By pattern this would imply numerous instances of appeasement-aggression towards a multitude of "new-comers", and over the same time frame, this appeasement-aggression did not surface in the U.S, but both did appease and turn in a vicious manner, difference is America did not see birth to a Hitler (although the anti-black sentiment was...and is....notable, but not as systematic), but this would hardly constitute a pattern, nor an acceptance as a Saviour by the whole of the population.

In general (and blacks and Orientals are special cases), America has always been far more open to immigrants. The lack of an established or official church, the existence of the frontier for a long time, etc. contributed to this.

Blacks and orientals are a tougher situation. Given their visible differences, they don't "melt" into the melting pot so readily. Also, in the case of blacks, and to some extent Orientals, their presence in America was involuntary. Having gotten here, however, the alternative of going back was either not feasible nor attractive (Liberia attracted few freed slaves). The relatively awful governments and living conditions of Africa and Asia ensured this.

[bush_cheney2004]

Bush may realize there are dangerous situtations in the world, but he lacks the wisdom to understand them. I'd suggest the one area that is truly a danger is Iran, due to its instability, radicalism and pursuit of nucular power. But thanks to Iraq, the world is damned if it acts, damned if it doesn't.

In other words, the world "acting" really means the United States...again. Popular to hate American muscle except when "the world" wants to use it.

[stignasty]

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.

If you want to flip that coin over, you can say that the world is now appeasing the United States and it's only the "terrorists" who are standing in the face of American aggression.

[bush_cheney2004]

If you want to flip that coin over, you can say that the world is now appeasing the United States and it's only the "terrorists" who are standing in the face of American aggression.

Either way, Europe's name would still be "cowardice".