I would like to make two quick points.
First, I saw it in real time and I remember it as CM asking more what did Chamberlain do, esp in relation to the Munich Agreement, that constituted "appeasement". His guest obviously did not know that the Peace in Our Time Munich Agreement was England and France selling the Sudetenland out to the second worse Dictator in human history, Adolf Hitler.
Secondly, CM spoke as if Pre WWII western appeasement began and ended with the Munich Agreement. Additionally CM was confused about whose watch the Terrorist attack on the USS Cole happened. Neither one would be even an average student in a class studying Pre WWII Western Appeasement.
Third, what a Radio Talk Show host and/or a cable news guy says does not mean that they are, either one, actually well or deeply informed about the issues they are discussing. Western appeasement of Hitler and Nazi Germany began in the early 1930s with the systematic rearming of the German military through the Annexation of Austria through Munich. There is absolutely no historical evidence that anything short of overwhelming force would have deterred Hitler from the beginning. There are reams of evidence that he was playing the west like a drum and used the no preconditions diplomacy to buy himself years to build up his war machine and that after years of being on a war footing finally pushed England and France to action with his invasion of Poland. As an aside, if only the plight of Austria and Chezovalkia (sp).
If anyone wants a thourough grounding in Pre WWII Western Appeasement I suggest Vol I, The Gathering Storm, of Winston Churchill's six Vol History of WWII. It is quite a read.
I fear it's all too easy to turn the "what concession has been given?" question into a soundbite win - you can claim that, by talking to the terrorists/evildoers/whatever you lend them international credibility and provide a platform and audience for their hateful ideology. Matthews' interlocutor must have been pretty damn flat-footed.
Peter: I hope you turn out to be right about the impact of this Matthews' segment. (I followed your link and watched it on youtube. Somewhat entertaining, though it does not make me want to get a cable TV subscription.)
Grammie: Yes, C.Matthews perhaps implied that appeasement began and ended in Sept 1938 (he even was a little bit wobbly for a few seconds on 1938 vs '39). But keep in mind, this a cable shout show, not a classroom. In that context, Matthews did o.k., and he is certainly correct on the main point.
WC's (probably ghostwritten) histories of the Second World War should be taken with a grain of salt. Not sure what that means for the issues at stake, but just sayin'
Dr. Dan is causing me some confusion:
"WC's (probably ghostwritten) histories of the Second World War should be taken with a grain of salt"
While I agree with Dr. Dan that Churchill wrote his history with the direct purpose of influencing the debate in his favor, I'm puzzled why a writer as prolific as Churchill was would require the help of some hack ghostwriter ? Churchill was a journalist back when Lord Kitchener was crushing the Mahdi.
Zenpundit: see here.
I don't know about the motives or circumstances.
Gracias ! Printing it out
Sadly, Mark Green, the liberal guy, mis-speaks and refers to Osama as Obama before correcting himself quickly.
I wish CM was really going after right-wing obfuscation but he seems to just not have liked Kevin James. After all, he gives extensive play to Ann Coulter.
MSNBC is the anti-Fox and each seems to find pleasure in finding clever ways to make the right and left, respectively, look dumb. Olbermann is as over-the-top, if not more so than O'Reilly. Frankly, both (MSNBC and Fox as well as the two O's) make me a little queezy.
My seat warms to CNN. During election season, even more. I really want to hear both sides b/c despite the fanatical hatred the true blues and the true reds have for each other, there are some Americans (most Americans I believe) that still straddle the aisle.
(Hmm. I wonder who Chris Matthews is voting for.) I've NEVER seen someone fall all over a candidate more than CM has over Senator Obama. It's really sickening. I'm no fan of Ann Coulter, but she's about necessary on his show just to make the see-saw from crashing through the ground.
Must see TV? I stick by the ol' War Horse--CNN. At least they balance with some Glenn Beck.
Commenting by HaloScan.com
