consultation to assure peace. Both Daladier and Chamberlain
returned home to jubilant, welcoming crowds relieved that the
threat of war had passed, and Chamberlain told the British public
that he had achieved "peace with honour. I believe it is peace in
our time."
Chamberlain's policies were discredited the following year, when
Hitler annexed the remainder of Czechoslovakia in March and then
precipitated World War II by invading Poland in September. The
Munich agreement became a byword for the futility of appeasing
expansionist totalitarian states, although it did buy time for the
Allies to increase their military preparedness.
Copyright (c) 1996 Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc. All Rights
Reserved
Сколько немцев жило на территории Судетов и сколько немцев погибло во Второй мировой войне, прелюдией к которой стало Мюнхенское соглашение? Ножом и вилкой гаранты "во имя мира" кромсали Чехословакию. Фраза премьер-министра Великобритании Невилла Чемберлена, произнесенная им по возвращении из Мюнхена в Англию "Я привез вам мир", стала анекдотом и символом политической тупости.
Итак, Чехословакия имела хорошие гарантии, которые моментально исчезли, когда встал вопрос об их реализации. Мало того, что гаранты не выполнили свои обещания, они обвинили свою жертву во всех мыслимых и немыслимых грехах.
К вопросу о гарантах и гарантиях следует добавит слова "компромис" и "умиротворение". Дискуссия о соглашении в Ольстере шла под моим заголовком "THERE ARE NO COMPROMISES IN THE FIGHT AGAINST TERRORISM". Не имея возможности и не желая выполнить свои обязательства, гаранты выступают в роли миротворцев и ищут "компромис" между конфликтующими сторонами. Лучшие друзья превращаются в злейших врагов.
Вот мнение о миротворцах и сторонниках компромисов изложенное Larry Ball в двух посланиях. Я сконструировал из них одно и надеюсь автор простит меня.
Subject: Re: THERE ARE NO COMPROMISES IN THE FIGHT
AGAINST TERRORISM
Date: Wed, 22 Apr 1998 18:37:34 -0500
From: larry ball lball@INETNEBR.COM
To: CRIMINOLOGY@LISTSERV.GMD.DE
I agree with this poster about the situation in Northern Ireland.
Settlement of this issue has been attempted many times since Lord
Cromwell. Neither it or any other persistant political/cultural
matter will be settled by appeasement.
Appeasement is what the Northern Ireland agreement is all about.
Appeasement is also what is behind the pressure on Israel and the
Palestinians for settlement.
What Mr. Raikhlin has done here is to call into question the whole
insidious idea about an insidious movement called
Restorative/Justice. Restorative justice, compromise, appeasement,
what ever you call it will destroy civil society if it is given
full bit. RJ, compromise, appeasement, criminalize lawfulness, and
convert criminals into victims. In a way this is what is
happening in Ulster and also is what is being forced upon Israel.
Please notice my address, I am not a Zionist nor am I Irish.
The issue is the unfortunate use of "conflict resolution" to
terminate chaotic behavior and discarding punishment for crime.
Can any "social dyamics model" predict outcomes? Probably. But
is it correct to construct social policy arround ANY social
science prediction without having regard for the fundamental
beliefs and rights of those whom you are trying to impose your
social engineering upon?
I, for one, believe that those of you who are aghast at "zionist
chest beating" are, in fact, expressing your distaste for the very
idea of "culture."
Larry Ball
lball@inetnebr.com