Appeasement in Real Time

Biden and Blinken pay the Dane-Geld

It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say:--

For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say:

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!"

Rudyard Kipling, Dane-Geld (closing verses).

LESSONS OF MUNICH – WEAKNESS INVITES AGGRESSION.

Showing weakness has long been regarded as an invitation to aggression and war. Perhaps the most infamous example in modern history is Neville Chamberlain’s sit-down with Adolph Hitler in Munich in 1938, where he agreed to appease Hitler by agreeing to Germany’s annexation of the Sudetenland, in exchange for “peace for our time.”  

But history has taught us that, like paying the Dane-Geld, such appeasement is more likely to cause war and indescribable suffering than it is to prevent it.  Despite those blood-soaked lessons, the appeasement gene continues to proliferate among cowardly politicians. 

There are countless examples of this in modern history, but it is beyond the scope of this short article to attempt to catalogue them here.  Each reader will think of examples. 

Often the end results of policy decisions and statements, and how they invite more aggression and war, are not fully apparent until sometime later when it is too late because the damage has already occurred.  Joe Biden’s statement that a limited Russian invasion of Ukraine might be somewhat tolerable or at least met with dissention among the Western allies, is a good example.  Predicting what Russia would do, he said, “it depends on what it does. It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion and we end up having to fight about what to do and not do." Even though Biden and his handlers tried to “walk back” (the press’ euphemism of correcting a dumb statement) that invitation, the damage was already done – Biden had sent a signal to Putin of his thinking, and it was a signal of weakness.

To the extent that we can, it therefore is important to call out such projections of weakness and appeasement in real time, as they are occurring. Because of the homicidal intent of the Islamists in the Mideast – indeed, across the globe – it is of over-riding importance to shine a light – no, to focus, focus and focus – on the most recent examples of this appeasement that are certain to cause more bloodshed, not only in Israel and the Mideast, but in the United States, Europe, and other countries worldwide.

I am referring to the blatant lies and craven cowardice by U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken and his ostensible boss, Joe Biden, which have further encouraged Iran in its support for its and its proxies’ murderous jihad against Israel (and potentially the U.S. and Europe) about the supposed non-involvement of Iran in the barbaric atrocities Hamas is perpetrating upon Israeli civilians. These are not civilian “collateral damage” caused by bombing, when Hamas attempts to hide among civilian shields or has situated its arms caches near hospitals and mosques.  And, contrary to some attempts by our media to equate the two, they most decidedly are not in any way comparable to the IDF’s targeting and killing of the barbaric Hamas fighters terrorists. 

Blinken led off on Sunday, October 8, with his claim that our government has no evidence that Iran is behind Hamas’ bloody and barbaric attacks on women, girls, babies, and other civilians. And his weasel-worded statement encourages both Iran and Hamas with its blatant evasions and flat-out lies.

BLINKEN’S WEASEL-WORDED EVASIONS AND DENIALS

 Sunday, on NBC’s Meet the Press, and CNN’s State of the Union.  Blinken said, “In this moment, we don't have anything that shows us that Iran was directly involved in this attack, in planning it or in carrying it out.” “In this specific instance, we have not yet seen evidence that Iran directed or was behind this particular attack.”

What a weasel-worded evasion. These are people who carefully plan their statements and choose their words carefully.  So, look at the qualifier:  Blinken claims that we have no evidence that Iran was “directly” involved. That qualifier concedes that we do have evidence that Iran was indirectly involved. 

Blinken’s claim that we have no evidence that Iran even “was behind this particular attack” crosses the line from evasion to outright falsehood.  It has long been known that Iran is Hamas’ financial backer.  Without Iran’s financial support Hamas would not have been able to launch this barbaric wave of terror. So, was the country that funded the attack “behind it”?

As Iran International reports, “Blinken's statement contradicts years of evidence which has proven that Iran pays Hamas around $100m annually, as was announced in 2018 by the then-Middle East envoy Jason Greenblatt, under the Donald Trump administration.” (bolded emphasis added)

Blinken says that we don’t have “anything” showing that Iran was “behind” the attack. We also do not have anything showing that, say, Iceland or Bolivia was involved. As I have written previously, we are led by Donkeys.  

Not “anything”? Consider just these ‘anythings’ reported by the Wall Street Journal and other sources and the application of common sense:

•        Iran is Hamas’ principal financial backer. Hamas would not have initiated this attack without the approval of the country upon which it depends for survival.  

•        In 2021 on ABC’s “This Week” Blinken himself told George Stephanopoulos that “Iran is engaged in a number of activities, including funding extremist groups, supporting terrorism more broadly, supporting very dangerous proxies that are taking destabilizing actions throughout the Middle East, proliferating weapons.” The notion that such broad support, including “proliferating weapons” has not facilitated the current terror campaign is nothing short of willful blindness, or worse. 

•        Hamas could not possibly have launched this complex, multi-dimensional attack without Iranian backing. White House spokesman John Kirby has admitted that “Hamas wouldn't have been able to function at all had it not been for propping up by the Iranian Regime. But we haven't seen any specific evidence that tells us they were wittingly involved in the planning or involved in the resourcing and the training that went into this very complex set of attacks over the weekend.” “Wittingly”? So, Kirby would have us believe that Hamas pulled the wool over its benefactor’s eyes to launch an unauthorized attack?

•       Are we to conclude that Hamas’ more sophisticated missiles and underwater drones were jury-rigged in tunnels and basements in Gaza? Perhaps they were supplied by Bolivia?

•        And consider the detailed reporting by the Wall Street Journal that provided detailed reports by both Hamas representatives as well as European and Israelis of planning meetings between the Iranian Quds Force leaders and Hamas and other terrorists that occurred “at least biweekly in Lebanon.”

BLINKEN AND BIDEN DOUBLE DOWN

Both Blinken and Biden demonstrated more weakness on Tuesday. Blinken refused to say that the administration would take steps to revoke any possibility that Iran would get the much-discussed $6 billion that originally was frozen as a sanction for its support of terrorism.  Those funds supposedly were to be used only for humanitarian relief. But almost a month before Hamas’ attack, Iran’s president made clear that they would use the money “wherever we need it.” Believe them.

For his part, in his televised address that same day, Biden gave a speech about the conflict.  But in those comments, Biden did not once mention Iran’s support for Hamas. Not a word. That failure sent another message of weakness to our enemies.

[Update Oct. 11, 5:30 pm:] After this article was originally posted, Biden addressed a group of Jewish leaders at the White House. I give him credit for that. In that talk he finally mentioned Iran, saying “[W]e made it clear to the Iranians, ‘Be careful.’” That would have been a good forum to announce that any nuclear talks with Iran are dead, will not be restarted, and that Iran will not be allowed to acquire nuclear weapons but will reap the whirlwind if it tries. At a minimum, Biden should have announced the reimposition of the freeze on the $6 billion that he earlier agreed to release to Iran.

Biden might put together other punishing sanctions and action against Iraq. This author does not have the expertise to list and evaluate them all. But in an ideal scenario, perhaps Iran should find that it has lost the use of its largest oil refinery and of the docking facilities that allow its oil to be shipped by sea.

The essential point is that any future action, even if successful in the end, comes too late when it is the result of a display of weakness or indecision. Hamas’ latest atrocities come after Biden’s implicit invitation by his shows of weakness. If he acquires new resolve, it will have been necessitated by his earlier displays of weakness. The best that the administration can do now to mitigate the damages caused by its ineptitude, is to pivot to a policy of the strength expected of a world superpower. So, we shall see what this administration considers necessary and what it does.

PAYING THE DANE-GELD

Blinken’s denials in the face of all available evidence and Biden’s refusal to even mention Iran, are so blatant that they cannot be chalked up to the Administration’s now-customary incompetence.  He is lying and the Congress and responsible people must probe the motivations behind his lies and their likely consequences.  The question is, not whether Blinken is telling the truth, but “Why is he lying?”

They are paying Iran the Dane-Geld, that is why. 

Biden has been paying off Iran, not only by first agreeing to release, and now refusing to rule out, a reimposition of the freeze of the $6 billion.  But that $6 billion is a just a fraction of the benefits Biden has allowed Iran to reap. Iran has collected a huge amount of oil revenues due to Biden’s failure to enforce the economic sanctions previously imposed. The Wall Street Journal has reported that its revenues from oil exports this year alone are $30 - $40 million.   

The most valuable Dane-Geld that the administration insists upon paying, however, is rewarding Iran by first scrapping Trump’s termination of the negotiations over Iran’s nuclear program and then making it the centerpiece of Biden’s Mideast policy.  Despite any agreement that is reached, we know that Iran will cheat. No serious person can credibly assert that the result will not green-light Iran’s eventual possession of nuclear weapons.  Not if, but when. 

CAN IT COME HERE?

The short answer to this is, “Yes. Next question.” For anyone who requires an explanation, rather that showing strength, Biden and Blinken are too cowardly to take a strong position against Iran. Rather than even criticize a terrorist outlaw regime, Biden hopes to consummate a nuclear treaty with mullahs who make no secret of their religious desire to destroy “the Great Satan,” and who support the beheading of infants and their mothers.

During Biden’s administration, there has been an increasing number of criminal “migrants” on the FBI’s terrorist watch list, who have been apprehended at our Southern border, including 160 through July 2023 alone in just this year. As of April 2023, the Border Patrol confirmed that 1.2 million illegal “migrants” “got away” from authorities while crossing the border under this administration. And these got-aways are just those who were spotted but not apprehended.  If only 0.1 % of those among them are terrorists, that would be an additional 1,200 terrorists God-knows-where in the U.S. And, we have no idea how many terrorists have infiltrated into the Country, often with the aid of the Mexican drug cartels, without being caught. But it is a certainty that they are here. 

Does anyone believe they will not attempt another attack here? Not a limited isolated attack on a single nightclub or a pipe bomb in Times Square, but a massive and complex attack intended to inflict maximum horror such as the murder of thousands, beheading of babies, recording the murder of grandmothers and sending the videos to their families, burning women and children alive, and more.

Do not think that cannot happen here. And, for our political leaders, you must do everything in your power to stop this appeasement. “For the end of that game is oppression and shame, and the nation that plays it is lost.”

I close with the full rendition of Dane-Geld, a timely lesson for the days to come.

Dane-Geld

A.D. 980 - 1016

It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbor and to say —
"We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."

And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!

It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say --
"Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the
time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.

It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say:

"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that plays it is lost!"