Give Piece a Chance!

Democrats, as lead by Obama, are in a furor over the suggestion that talking to Amadinijhad (note that Obama didn't originally say 'talk with' but 'negotiate with') is equivalent to Chamberlain talking to Hitler in 1939, the difference as they see it being that Hitler was unique, expressed brilliantly by a liberal pundit as "Hitler was Hitler". But Hitler was not unique, he was not different from any other tyrant before or since who dreamed of conquering the world and avenging percieved past wrongs. The nut case in Iran, like Hitler (a man he openly admires), wants to become the dominate player in his region. He wants to destroy the Jews, who he blames all his peoples troubles on, and he is willing to destroy his country and the majority of his people to accomplish his goals. Oh, and he has openly written about his plans. No, he is nothing like Hitler! What would talking to this man, or any lunatic, accomplish? You can't reason with someone who is unreasonable. Any dialog will revolve around placating him in some way, giving in to some demand or another, in exchange for some empty promise to not develop nuclear weapons or wage war on Israel or to stop sponsoring terror. At the end of such negotiations, only one side (the non-lunatic side) will intend to keep their promises. So he will emerge with enhanced prestige, some concession from us giving him something he is not entitled to (like the piece of Checkoslovakia that Chamberlain gave up, in this case likely a piece of Iraq), and he will continue on with his lunatic agenda, just like Hitler, surprising only the liberals who thought for sure this time would be different.