History Lesson
New Republic’s Scoblic beats conservatives with conservatives to defend Obama’s talk about talk with dictators. Talking worked with the Soviets, Scoblic opines, variously using a magnifying glass and a funhouse mirror to examine history’s miniscule details undistracted by any large inconvenient objects. LA Times:
But if there is anything that has been discredited by history, it is the argument that every enemy is Hitler, that negotiations constitute appeasement, and that talking will automatically lead to a slaughter of Holocaust-like proportions. It is an argument that conservatives made throughout the Cold War, and, if the charge seemed overblown at the time, it seems positively ludicrous with the clarity of hindsight.
…
Containment, negotiation, nuclear stability — each of these things helped protect the United States and end the Cold War. And yet, at the time, conservatives thought each was synonymous with appeasement.
He works through the Cuba missile crisis, Carter, Reagan and Gorbachev to Clinton, Bush and Kim Jong Il to make the case for talk. Not every dictator is Hitler. 2008 isn’t 1938.
There are a couple of problems with his argument. Obama’s 2009 plan bears little resemblance to JFK’s 1962 stance or Reagan’s in the 1980s. In the cases he cites in which negotiations led to Soviets backing down it was in the face of strong, credible military threats, something he alludes to in passing. JFK and Reagan negotiated from positions of strength, and did not signal a willingness to give up prior to talks. Cuba was blockaded by the United States Navy and Gorbachev was confronted with a military buildup and technological develoment he couldn’t match, and determined support for resistance in various forms from Poland to Afghanistan to Nicaragua and elsewhere. The Carter era, cited as a banner success thanks to missile talks, also marked a period of Soviet escalation and expansion of its efforts, in Afghanistan, Central America and Africa.
The citation of Clinton and North Korea is a little bizarre. Presumeably Scoblic’s aware that North Korea not only continued its nuclear program, and apparently has been spreading the joy.
If Obama’s program of withdrawal and asking Iran for assistance in the dismantling of our influence in the Middle East bears any resemblance to any of that history, it would be the Clinton/North Korea part.
Welcome RCP, etal, always good to see you. Obama = Kennedy, right? Reminds me of that big JFK speech … you know, to bear any lightweight. Get your war on with some light Sunday reading: Last War, This War, Next War. But first, you will want to meet the real-life Bart Simpson, selfless American hero, and mull the debate about his kind.
Re Obama, they’re lining up the usual suspects in advance of Kentucky. He’s not the only one fighting prejudice. When he loses in November, you know what they are going to say. But if the Republicans keep this and this up, we won’t need to worry about that.
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:40 am on Sunday, May 18, 2008
6 Responses to “History Lesson”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
May 18th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
If Obama wins in November, it’s going to be a disaster, probably in ways we haven’t even considered yet. For one thing, it will be decades before another black man can ever credibly run for president.
May 18th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
I don’t share Rebecca’s view on Obama.
I would agree that there are somethings I do not agree with Obama on.
Such as: 1. I dont believe he backs the second amendment enough
2. Roe V. Wade is a abuse of federal power.
But I believe Obama to be more economically responsible than McCain. And that is a big thing for me.
May 18th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
An Obama Administration will be the Second Coming of the Carter Administration, not only in foreign affairs but also in economic affairs.
People should read what he has to say, instead of listening to it. His performance hypnotizes listeners into accepting nonsense they would never let pass if they were paying attention.
May 19th, 2008 at 12:34 am
People should read what he has to say, instead of listening to it. His performance hypnotizes listeners into accepting nonsense they would never let pass if they were paying attention.
Kinda like this, Michael?
But I believe Obama to be more economically responsible than McCain.
May 19th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
I witnessed Jimmy Carter in power. What an absolutely bumbling fool. If it wasn’t for Sadat making a heroic decision to compromise with Israel, he’d have absolutely nothing to show for 4 wasted years of administration. Except long gas lines, 14% mortgage rates, unemployment, and the emergence of fundamentalist Islam.
Idiocy, know thy name.
May 20th, 2008 at 12:13 am
You’ll have to ask kylek that question TRJS. There is a creepy, quasi-fascist adulation to Senator Obama’s supporters. The tendency to see in him what the observers want to see, and not what is actually there, is very disturbing.