Netanyahu vs. Chamberlain

Both Netanyahu and Chamberlain led a policy of appeasement, that is, a policy to satisfy the demands of pure evil in exchange for peace. 

Chamberlain:

• Hiter did not commit mass murder on the scale of Oct. 7 during Chamberlain’s time. Indeed, many were sceptical about how serious Hitler was in implementing his openly declared intentions. 

• Until WW2, The Nazis didn't commit any acts of direct violence against Britain. 

• When Germany invaded Poland, after 28 months of appeasement, Chamberlain had the integrity to realise that his policy was wrong, and then he let others take his place.

Netanyahu:

• It was widely known to everyone in Israel that Hamas was serious in its openly declared intentions to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth. Before Oct 7th, Hamas already had the blood of hundreds of Israelis on its hands.

• Despite all of that direct violence against Israel, Netanyahu preserved Hamas’s existence and allowed millions of dollars to flood into Gaza in order to preserve peace. 

• Even after the biggest terror attack in the history of Israel, Netanyahu still does not have the integrity to realise that his appeasement policy of over 14 years has been fundamentally wrong and take responsibility for it. 

• Moreover, Netanyahu now proceeds to cut yet another hostage deal with Hamas, which means a continuation of the same catastrophic appeasement. 

Any comparison between Netanyahu and Chamberlain is unjust and unfair towards Chamberlain. Chamberlain represents an honest misunderstanding of the evil he was dealing with, an unprecedented evil in modern history. When he realised his error, he allowed others to take his place.

Netanyahu represents a catastrophic failure in foreign policy on a scale unmatched in recent history. Not only did Netanyahu fail to learn the historical lesson from Chamberlain, but Netanyahu had 14 years of appeasement, which eventually led up to Oct. 7. Even after that, he proceeded to appease evil without taking any responsibility for it.