Barak H. Obama. The Neville Chamberlain of our times? Yes/No? (how much, cost)

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by skoro

Lots of wingnuts will be utterly confused by this poll.

You'll have to explain to them who Neville Chamberlain was.

That's true. A lot of leftist wingnuts would be confused.

[skoro]

Originally Posted by Fleet

That's true. A lot of leftist wingnuts would be confused.

You must have voted "yes."

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by skoro

You must have voted "yes."

And you must think that Obama is a "terrific" president.

[ovcatto]

I'm at a total loss of how Obama could be even remotely identified with Neville Chamberlain considering that fact that U.S. troops are actively deployed in combat missions across most of the globe. It simply defies what little logic some folks may have left.

[wade52]

Originally Posted by ovcatto

I'm at a total loss of how Obama could be even remotely identified with Neville Chamberlain considering that fact that U.S. troops are actively deployed in combat missions across most of the globe. It simply defies what little logic some folks may have left.

It's an insult, so conservobots will use it to take a swipe at Obama. Its nonsensical nature doesn't register with them.

[skoro]

Originally Posted by Fleet

And you must think that Obama is a "terrific" president.

He's the best since Reagan.

[Fleet]

Originally Posted by skoro

He's the best since Reagan.

Obama is the "best" at running up the national debt!

[plwhit]

Nope, like comparing apples to oranges.......

Chamberlain didn't want to change the fundamental English government like Obama wants to change the government in America.

And Chamberlain had years of governmental experience unlike the clueless Obama

Chamberlain only wanted to appease Hitler, Obama wants to appease everyone everywhere.

[Dane_in_LA]

Originally Posted by Gearhound

England and France had lost an entire generation of young men in WWI.
For them, another war was to be avoided, at almost all cost?
Hindsight being 20-20; they didn't realize what a madman they were dealing with.

Even they'd realized it, they couldn't very well kick off war in 1938. RAF, for instance, was in the middle of a technology revamp - fabric-covered biplanes giving way to metal monoplanes - and they were hurting. (France's air force was in the same spot in 1940. Bad timing, that.)

[desertdetroiter]

Originally Posted by Cavaturaccioli

I'll reserve judgement until I see how he handles North Korea.

He'll handle North Korea the same way every other U.S. president has. Talk tough, but in the end, everything stays the same. You can call that appeasement if you want, but we're not going to war with North Korea no matter how much the nutcases on the right might want us to.