After listening to President Bush accuse Barack Obama of being an American version of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, I found myself embarrassed by our commander in chief’s comments before the Israeli Knesset. He said that that sitting down with the Iranian government to hold bilateral talks was the same as Nazi appeasement leading up to World War II.
I was born on Sept. 3, 1939, the day the United Kingdom and France declared war on Hitler and Germany. My wife suffered as a young girl throughout WWII in the Netherlands under the brutal jackboot of a Nazi regime. My grandfather was a British naval officer and my father-in-law a Dutch naval officer, who fought in both the Atlantic and Pacific theaters of war. So when one hears the careless and erroneous comments made by a historically challenged president, it leaves one shaken and angry.
As a historical correction, appeasement did not take place when Hitler invaded Poland. Notwithstanding the fact that the U.K. and France lacked the military might, they stood up to the Nazis and declared war on Sept. 3, 1939. The question of appeasement came up at Munich in 1938 when Hitler told Chamberlain that Germany was going to seize control of the Sudetenland in present day Czechoslovakia. That was the German speaking portion of that small country. Given the circumstances, the Allies were in no position to thwart Hitler’s intentions and capitulated to the Little Corporal’s demands. As a footnote, Hitler felt encouraged by positions taken by conservative members of the U.S. Congress, German lobbyists, isolationists led by Charles Lindbergh and groups here in America who admired the rise of Hitler and his National Socialist government. We tend to forget this lamentable period in American history, which kept Jewish refugees from American shores and allowed the German military to grow and flourish. In fact, if we hadn’t been attacked by the Japanese at Pearl Harbor on Dec. 7, 1941, Congress might never have declared war on Germany.
As far as negotiating with Iran’s "Axis of Evil” government, wouldn’t it be better to find ways to cooperate with them rather than continually finding ourselves in an ongoing game of Dulles brinksmanship? Remember that Mr. Bush’s ill-fated invasion of Iraq five years ago was the catalyst for creating the sad geopolitical scenario that exists today in the Middle East. Iran has become a stronger power in the region because of skyrocketing oil prices, its influence on Iraq’s Shia population, the presence of American troops in Mesopotamia and the collapse of Saddam Hussein’s government. All of this happened because of our president’s propensity to rely on “gung ho” military power rather than diplomacy. One should never forget that President Ronald Reagan negotiated behind closed doors with the Ayatollah Khomeni, the Iranian despot, to secure the release of American hostages in 1981. No one died.
Given Mr. Bush’s track record over the past seven years, it would be prudent for him during the waning days of his administration to conduct himself in an intelligent and dignified manner that reflects well on the Office of the President of the United States of America. No more dumb accusations. Mark Twain, the wonderful humorist and American icon once penned, “All you need in this life is ignorance and confidence and then success is sure.” Has Mr. Bush ever read Samuel Clemens' “Tom Sawyer" or "Huckleberry Finn"?
Bill Tilney was mayor of El Paso from 1991-93














BARRY COLEMAN
May 15, 2008
AS A LONG TIME DEMOCRAT,AND VETERAN I AM REALLY SADDENED AND ANGRY BY THE CONSISTENT EFFORTS TO LABEL DEMOCRATS AS HATING AMERICA, PINKO LIBERALS, COMMUNIST SYMPATHIZERS, WEEKKNEED EFFETE LIBERALS.ETC... FOR BUSH TO PANDER TO THE ISRAELS WITH HIS MILITARY PROFILE..AND MCCAIN TO ECHO THOSE COMMENTS IS DISGUSTING, AND SURPRISING......AND UN AMERICAN...
Rich Wright
May 15, 2008
That Bill Tilney is a smart guy.
DJM
May 16, 2008
Although I fancy myself a advocate for the poor, I have to face the fact that it were not for grocery-related industry lobby we would have more than $40+ billion in food stamps going to the poor (or to the grocery chains).
Notwithstanding, Bush's ideology or way in which in came into power, he did one thing no other president did in the past 20 years (from Reagan to Clinton) invade not one but two Arba countries to drive home one impression: you harbor, tolerate or aide terrorists who take American lives, you will lose your country. It was the lack of retailiation or fear of retaliation that encouraged the Sept. 11 attack. Since Afgah and Iraq, there have been no state sponsored terrorist attacks. Even state sympathizers of terrorists cautioned against attacks that would provoke the "crazy" Bushites (neo-cons). This atmosphere, whether we want to admit or not, has kept us free of attack.
For those powerless (not in the decision making circles) It is not the ulterior motives of the actors but the outcomes of their actions. I do not have to be a Democrat or Republican or Liberterian to appreciate seven years of peace at home.
As for the invasion of Iraq, I still believe it was good that it was done; albeit carelessly. I do not care if it motivated by oil; revenge for attempts to assassinate Bush I; the invasion served its purposes (a) put all Arab countries on notice and (b) stopped the mass murder of human beings. I am convinced Libya turned in its nukes for fear of losing its country.
The "decent" (ugly) American people stood and watched 20,000,000+ blacks perish over 150 years of slavery; 5,000,000 Jews because we did not want to go to war (until we were iinvaded); 800,000 Rwandans because we "prefer" diplomacy. Yes, American are a very tolerant people, of genocide; when it is not they who suffer: so the invastion of Iraq, if not only to stop the kiilling fields, was worth it.
McAvoy Layne
May 16, 2008
Bravo! Well said! Right on dead center!
Walt
May 18, 2008
President Bush never mentioned Obamas name. Your reportiing like all liberals is biased and inaccurate.
Border Yankee
May 18, 2008
DJM, YOU hit it on the nose. G.W. might be a lot of things, but stupid, wreckless and incompetent on National Security is NOT among them.
David K
May 18, 2008
That was a great peace except for GETTING YOUR FACTS WRONG!
wake up - Bush was talking about Jimmy Carter.. you know, the guy that was just over there a few weeks ago kissing the enemy.
The sad thing is that Barack Obama is hung by his own words and you guys are pretending they don't exist. Barack's camp felt so guilty for what he had said in the past they stepped in and took the heat for Jimmy Carter!
If you're offended by something being said about Jimmy Carter, you're going to have a long election season!
Brown Cracker
May 18, 2008
I agree with DJM as well. Thank you for your well thought out insight. I believe you have very efficiently sumized what most hard-working, patriotic Americans feel. Thanks.
Bill Tilney
May 26, 2008
With all due respect to Messrs DJM. Brown Cracker, David K, Border Yankee, and Walt, I would like to point out that I am not an obsessed liberal nor an obnoxious conservative. I am an American first and foremost. During my Foreign Service career which covered almost 30 years, I served in Ethiopia, the Congo, Nigeria, South African, the Dominican Republic, France, Argentina and Mexico. That included four years as the American Consul General in Ciudad Juarez. I additionally was in Lebanon during its first civil war and Iran at the time of the fall of the Shah. I lost a good number of colleagues and friends to terrorists attacks long before 9/11. Notwithstanding that fact, I was fortunate to represent the United States of America long before I became mayor of your beautiful city.
I appreciated DJM's comments concerning President Bush's ideology, but beg to differ that by invading two Arab countries, we have prevented terrorist attacks at home. When the Soviets invaded Afghanistan in the late 1970s, they thought they would stop terrorism at home. Instead it lead to the demise of the USSR. The collapse of the ruble and the Soviet government was a direct result of an ill concieved foreign policy. Thank God that there have been no attacks on our beloved nation, but there is no doubt that American economic and commercial power has been greatly diminished by our ill advised venture into Mesopotomia. Just look at the effect that oil at $135.00 a barrel is having on citizenry. In a sense that is a form of economic terrorism on our country. In addition, President George W. Bush makes one feel embarassed by chasing after the King of Saudi Arabia begging him to lower oil prices There is no way President Reagan nor President Eisenhower would have placed themselves in that humiliating postion. I served as mayor during Desert Storm and fully believed we did the right thing. President George H. Bush surrounded himself with a cadre of outstanding advisors including Scowcroft, Powell, Baker and other intelligent and patriotic Americans who did the right thing. They did not allow themselves to put their own economic interests above the nations interest. I have reservations about some of the "ChickenHawks" who played a role in influencing our present commander in chief to invade Iraq. What motivated them to push for war?
While I realize we all have differing points of views, I can only cite the old adage which states the following: " While I may not agree with your opinion, I will defend to the death your right to say it" That is the American way of life. Regards Bill Tilney