"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
NOYB wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...

NOYB wrote:

"DSK" wrote in message
et...


Bert Robbins wrote:


Diplomacy only works when there is a threat of military coercion.

Wrong.


No, he's right. The one example you cited (Marshall Plan) was
implemented *after* military action. Name an instance of international
tension that ended positively as the result of a bribe and *without* the
threat of military action. The closest example that I can find is the
downing of the Navy plane by China just 4 years ago. However, we gained
virtually nothing with our appeasement. China continues to violate
international trade laws, continues to arm rogue nations, and continues
to expand its military and threaten Taiwan.







Jimmy Carter and the leaders of Egypt and Israel came to terms without
the threat of military action.


And where did things stand just a few short years later? No *lasting*
result is accomplished through appeasement.




Where do things stand?

Egypt and Israel are still at peace with each other. And it wasn't
appeasement that brought about the peace, it was negotiation and
concession, and that is the way mature adults play the game.

When nations are involved it is called biding your time.

Are all the issues between Egypt and Israel settled? Nope. But the parties
talk, and they are not shooting at each other.

Wasn't the Islamic Brotherhood started in Egypt?