this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
288 points (96.8% liked)

politics

19196 readers
2273 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Hungarian leader praised Republican front-runner as a “man of peace.”

Donald Trump will totally stop funding Ukraine if he wins the U.S. election in November, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán said following a meeting between the right-wing figureheads.

“He will not give a penny in the Ukraine-Russia war,” Orbán told Hungarian state media Sunday. “Therefore, the war will end, because it is obvious that Ukraine can not stand on its own feet.”

The longtime allies met last Friday at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida, a summit which was lambasted by U.S. President Joe Biden.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] cynar 11 points 9 months ago (1 children)

While Chamberlain was applying appeasement, he was also rapidly upgrading the UK's military capability.

He then fell on his own (proverbial) sword, to let Churchill take power.

Don't compare these Muppets to a politician who actually did what he could to slow the wolves down enough to fight back.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

You are quite right to raise this point.

Relevant wikipedia article for those who are unaware:

Public opinion in Britain throughout the 1930s was frightened by the prospect of German terror bombing of British cities, which had started during the First World War. The media emphasised the dangers, and the general consensus was that defence was impossible and, as Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin had said in 1932, "The bomber will always get through". However, the Royal Air Force had two major weapons systems in the works: better interceptors (Hurricanes and Spitfires) and especially radar. They promised to counter the German bombing offensive but were not yet ready and so appeasement was necessary to cause a delay. Specifically, regarding the fighters, the RAF warned the government in October 1938 that the German Luftwaffe bombers would probably get through: "the situation... will be definitely unsatisfactory throughout the next twelve months"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeasement

The whole article is worth a read. TLDR: Chamberlain's legacy and foreign policy has been (partially) re-evaluated.

[–] UnderpantsWeevil 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Might be worth remembering that while Tories like Chamberlain were busy appeasing Hitler's Germany, they were significantly less dovish towards Lenin's Russia.

British Tories endorsed the White Army in its war to reclaim Moscow, following the 1917 revolution. Brits participated in the blockade of Russian ports and harassment of their officials through the collapse of the Tory government in 1921. And the Brits, with Churchill as their Chancellor of the Exchequer, conducted a kind of Cold War with the Soviets well into the 1930s. The Munich Agreement was, at least in part, an effort to contain the Communists of Czechoslovak Sudetenland.

So much of the Western treatment towards the Germans during the 30s was, at its heart, a response to the failures of the Romanov Government at the end of WW1. And there was significant speculation - particularly with the Soviet economic boom of pre-WW2 era - that they'd be the Big Bad all the western powers were going to have to rally against. So Germany was - both directly by US business and indirectly by British appeasement - propped up as a regional counterweight.