According to Answers.com
1. An act of appeasing.
2. The condition of being appeased.
3. The policy of granting concessions to potential enemies to maintain peace.
What policy has the Bush Administration followed since taking office?
The President entered the White House vowing to change the tone in Washington. He ignored the damage done to White House grounds and equipment by departing Clinton staffers, going so far as to deny they did any. The President has signed every bill sent to him by Congress, even some which were blatantly unconstitutional like Campaign Finance Reform. In fact, he once bragged that he would sign any legislation they sent him.
President Bush has kept on numerous Clinton appointees, despite clear evidence that many of them have been duplicitous. He has been faced with a parade of ex-Clinotonistas like Joe Wilson and Richard Clark who have, while working in his Administration, attacked his policies and undercut his efforts. He kept Clinton`s CIA director in office, allowing that agency to remain a festering sore in his Administration. He has been trying to ``change the tone``.
President Bush campaigns for RINO Arlen Specter over conservative Pat Toomey, then is surprised when Specter repeatedly knifes him in the back. He tried to give America Harriet Myers, rather than a solid conservative, because he didn`t want to fight the Democrats. He backed the ``gang of 14`` rather than encourage Congressional Republicans to institute rule changes to stop filibustering by Democrats.
On the war in Iraq, the President conceded the argument over weapons of mass destruction, causing a major embarrassment to the credibility of the United States, and tying America`s hands in prosecuting the necessary next steps in the war. It turns out that the military has been finding these weapons all over the place
He gazed into Vladimir Putin`s eyes, and found a kindred spirit. Of course, the Russians were selling weapons by the ton to Iraq, and have been assisting Iran and North Korea with nuclear and missile technology.
The Chinese trade heavily with the United States, so no economic pressure has been brought to bear to rein in the crazy North Koreans.
Mexico is exporting her population by the millions to the United States, but the President fears a backlash, so insists on a useless guest-worker program, rather than taking steps to secure the borders.
Now, President Bush is going to cave to the recent Supreme Court Ruling, and grant Geneva Convention rights to captured Terrorists.
The Current Administration policy is appeasement. Appeasement of foes in Congress, appeasement of pseudo-friends in the business community, Latin America, Russia, China, etc. He even has suggested deals similar to the old Clinton deal for North Korea which got us into this predicament in the first place. President Bush seems to think that a warm smile and friendly demeanor will change the aggressive nature of all but a few radical Jihadists; he even refuses to accept that most of the Islamic world hates our guts and livers, but merely links our fight with a few bad apples. He did not support the military coup which forced Hugo Chavez briefly from power.
The President rarely bucks the media.
Aussiegirl at Ultima Thule is entirely correct; our current leadership seems to be whistling past the boneyard of history.
As she points out:Let us say it -- the present policy of the United States is one of appeasement. The president has lost his nerve. He is backpedaling as fast as his little bicycle-trained legs will allow. He's making nice with Europe and the UN and saying -- "See ma -- I am a good boy after all -- see? I'm willing to talk and to do diplomacy and I'm sorry I said those nasty things about Bin Laden and talked like a cowboy, because you know, I'm not a cowboy, not really, because I was born rich and I just play at being one down there on the ranch, and really most of my best friends are oil sheiks and stuff and I understand how the world works and I'm sorry I messed things up, but golly, you know it was the Christian thing to do and I hope that Zarqawi's heart was right with God when we dispatched him and it was not a very nice thing to do but we had to do it and we will stand down when they stand up and everybody wants to live in freedom and Islam is a religion of peace and our nation is founded on immigration........."
I`m not saying President Bush has been Neville Chamberlaine, but I am saying he is far too willing to play well with others-even others who want our collective heads mounted on their trophy walls. He seems to be afraid to act as decisively as needed. This is a period like no other in history; we have never had so many forces aligned against us which had the capability to actually destroy our nation and kill millions of people. Always in the past we have been protected by distance and physical limitations. Now our enemies are scattered, they`re cooperating, and they have the capabilities. There is nuclear proliferation, missile proliferation, chemical weapons, biological weapons, etc. in the hands of numerous nations and groups, all of whom are gunning for us. We cannot afford to make the mistakes which Presidents have been prone to in the past-this is life and death. It is unfortunate, but our leaders have to handle everything correctly the first time, or we face doom. Our President`s ``new tone`` may kill us in the end.
Consider what a policy of appeasement has wrought throughout history; In 991 Athelred, King of England, paid the Danegeld
-a bribe to be left alone by the Viking Danes. He paid 10,000 lbs weight in silver, then 16,000, then 24,000 etc. He eventually had to fight them.
The Russians routinely had to pay the Golden Horde not to raid their cities, as did the Ukrainians (whose cities they razed completely). Often, if payment was late, they would burn Russian cities to the ground. Moscow eventually worked up the nerve to fight them-and won.
The Roman Emperor Theodosius II paid the Huns a tribute
to leave them alone; want to guess how well that worked out?
Of course, the most famous case of appeasement was Neville Chamberlain`s attempt to keep Hitler happy at the expense of Czechoslovakia. It lead to a World War.
Most of the world does not understand the Christian virues of charity and forgiveness, and our world is, as Rush Limbaugh describes it, governed by the aggressive use of force. Is it unfortunate? Most certainly. Is it just? No. Is it something that can be changed? Not until the parousia. Too many people want to be ``the bigger man`` and ignore the slights of our enemies. This is folly; anyone who has seen a child on the playground knows that a bully will knock a kid who tries this into the next decade. We simply cannot close our eyes to aggression. The stakes are just too damn high.
Does America have the will to fight this war? The Bible points out that Nations get the leadership they deserve. America has been lukewarm to the important things, and far too willing to fight viciously over the mundane; we have gotten a mundane and blind leadership. ``As ye sew, so shall ye reap``.
Considering the forces against us, and our lack of leadership and will, I fear for the future. Aussiegirl is right to be afraid.