Goodbye, appeasement; Obama's foreign policy was as much a product of his own vanity as anything else.

How can Obama still be worshipped so when his fecklessness and cowardice were on display for eight full years?

Hat tip to Monty Python

Elad Hakim  "When we were in school, most of us probably knew several kids who always “talked tough.” They were bullies and threatened “consequences” if their demands were not met. However, when they were confronted, or when someone stood up to them, they backed off, ran away, and hid until it was safe to come back. On the other hand, when those who were bullied continued to give in to their demands, their losses became more significant over time. While not all bullies are the same, one thing is clear: you can’t defeat a bully by running away or by appeasement.

"The policy of “running away” or appeasing others was implemented by some of our previous presidents. Red lines were laid out, yet quickly “forgotten” although they were clearly and blatantly violated. For example, in or about 2012, President Obama made the following statement:

"We have been very clear to the Assad regime, but also to other players on the ground, that a red line for us is we start seeing a whole bunch of chemical weapons moving around or being utilized. That would change my calculus. That would change my equation." 

"Notwithstanding President Obama’s designated “red line,” Bashar al-Assad, the president of Syria, subsequently ordered a devastating chemical attack against his own people. With his credibility on the line, and with the whole world watching, President Obama took no decisive action" . . .

Victor Davis Hanson discusses The Roots of Obama’s Appeasement

. . . President Obama currently is convinced that his singular charisma and rare insight into human nature will convince the Taliban to peacefully participate in Afghan politics. Obama will supposedly also win over the Iranian theocracy and show it how nonproliferation is really to everyone’s advantage.“Reset” diplomacy with Putin was supposed to lessen tensions — if, after the 2012 election, Putin just had more exposure to a flexible statesman of Obama’s wisdom.Throughout history, without the vanity of the conceder, there would never have been appeasement.Appeasement also always subordinates the interests of vulnerable third parties to the appeaser’s own inflated sense of self. When Chamberlain and the French prime minister Edouard Daladier signed the 1938 Munich Pact, they worried little about the fate of millions of Czechs who lost their country — and less about millions of Poles who were next in line for Hitler’s Blitzkrieg.Reset diplomacy with Russia in 2009 was not much concerned about the ensuing danger to Crimeans or Ukrainians. When the Taliban takes over, hundreds of thousands of reformist Afghans will die.