Sellout to Iran at Geneva worse than sellout to Hitler at Munich

Thomas Lifson
It was startling enough to hear a comparison of the Geneva accord with Iran to the Munich accord with Hitler, widely blamed for paving the way for WW II. But there is a good argument to be made that Geneva was actually worse.  Mark Steyn in NRO: In Geneva, the participants came to the talks with different goals: The Americans and Europeans wanted an agreement; the Iranians wanted nukes. Each party got what it came for. Before the deal, the mullahs' existing facilities were said to be within four to seven weeks of nuclear "breakout"; under the new constraints, they'll be eight to nine weeks from breakout. (snip) Bret Stephens in the Wall Street Journal argued that Geneva is actually worse than Munich. In 1938, facing a German seizure of the Sudetenland, the French and British prime ministers were negotiating with Berlin from a position of profound military weakness: It's easy to despise Chamberlain with the benefit of hindsight, less easy to give an honest answer as to...(Read Full Post)

COMMENTS ON AMERICANTHINKER