WHERE WERE YOU IN '39?: I'm generally supportive of the plan to invade Iraq and depose Saddam Hussein, and believe that he is a true threat to the U.S. and will continue to be as long as he's in power. But just as I generally hate hearing Hitler invoked in any form of modern debate about politics or foreign policy, I'm sick to death of this argument that "anyone who underestimates the threat of Saddam Hussein in 2002 sounds just like Neville Chamberlain in 1939." Yea, I suppose that's true. But if I were to say "no, I don't think my dog is much of a threat to start a major genocide or acquire weapons of mass destruction," wouldn't I also sound just like Neville Chamberlain in 1939, even though I'd be right? Intelligent people can disagree about foreign policy, and not every liberal is an appeaser, let's not forget that. I hear the same ill logic being used by extremist Jews who always see Holocaust II coming right around the corner, and anyone who disagrees is, once again, "just like 1939." That's starting to be up there, on the shear annoyance scale, with "worse than Hitler" and "otherwise, the terrorists win" in the realm of argumentative cheap-shots.
Posted by Stephen Silver at September 18, 2002 01:24 AM