Food for thought...

Here is an excerpt from a recent column by former New York Mayor Ed Koch, a Democrat:

"Anyone who knows me is aware that I am a proud American… It has become fashionable for Americans … to hold President George W. Bush up to derision. …I crossed party lines in 2004 to support the President’s reelection, saying at the time that … I did believe he was the only one running who appreciated the threat of Islamic terrorism to American values and Western civilization… I have no regrets for having made that decision...

"Today, according to the most recent CNN/Opinion Research Corp. survey, ‘71 percent of the American public disapprove of how Bush is handling his job as President, an all-time high in polling.’ His position can be compared with that of Harry Truman who left Washington unpopular and alone in 1953. Today, with the passage of time, most historians and certainly the American people, see Truman in a different light, primarily for his willingness to stand firm against Soviet aggression… Like Truman, George W. Bush, in my view, will be seen as one of the few world leaders who recognized the danger of Islamic terrorism and was willing with Tony Blair to stand up to it and not capitulate. …

"Recently, President Bush went to Israel to celebrate its 60th birthday as a nation and addressed its parliament, the Knesset. He said, “Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along. We have an obligation to call this what it is: the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.

"Bush’s remarks were heavily criticized by leading Democrats, particularly Barack Obama, who said, 'Now that’s exactly the kind of appalling attack that’s divided our country and that alienates us from the world.' Really? Is it wrong to call the philosophy supporting negotiating at the highest levels – President to President without pre-conditions -- with the terrorists and radicals by its rightful name - appeasement?

"The President was accurate in my opinion in recalling the specter of Neville Chamberlain’s pre-World War II efforts to satisfy Adolf Hitler. Those efforts responded to Hitler’s siren call that all he wanted was the Sudetenland, with Chamberlain responding, “yes,” and returning to Britain waving a paper and announcing, “peace in our time.” Must we really learn the terrible lesson of Munich all over again seventy years later? …

"The reason I believe history will redeem President George W. Bush is that he is one of the few leaders on the planet today who understands the larger picture. …He knows what calamities await the world if it engages in appeasement and deserts an ally in order to buy an illusory peace. We will recognize his worth long after he is gone.”