Commenter “Arafat” disagreed with my take on Republican foreign policy.

“The leader of America’s foreign policy cannot be someone who will treat Pakistan, a perilously important country in the Middle East, in such a derogatory manner.”

You sound like Neville Chamberlain. He said stuff like, “Hitler is (was) a man we can work with” and other constructive comments pretending Hitler and Nazi Germany were A-OK.

Sometimes it’s best to stop pretending a fascist is something other than a fascist.

Maybe you should read up on Chamberlain’s nemisis, William Churchill, who was not afraid to spit in the face of the PC crowd and to call Hitler and Nazi Germany the maniac and fascist state that they really were.

What’s wrong with calling Pakistan a loose cannon that breeds Islamists like they grow on trees? Is the truth really something to hide?

I’m assuming you’re talking about Winston Churchill, since the only William Churchill I could find was a British MP in the early 1700s. But let’s be clear about the history before we make these broad animadversions toward my position.

Neville Chamberlain is notorious for his so-called “appeasement” toward Hitler at Munich in 1938. There, Hitler got part of Czechoslovakia in exchange for not invading the rest of the country. Chamberlain went back to Britain proclaiming he had just enacted “peace for our time.”

Hitler then proceeded to invade the rest of Czechoslovakia.

You ask, “What’s wrong with calling Pakistan a loose cannon that breeds Islamists like they grow on trees?” There is nothing wrong for a pundit or historian to say that; it is wrong for the president of the United States to say that, for the same reason that it would be wrong for the president to recognize the Armenian genocide. In the case of the latter, it would lead to much more hostile relations with Turkey, a very important country in the region. It is the same with Pakistan.

To alienate these countries even more would likely lead to radical elements taking control, leading to more danger for our soldiers and making terrorism more likely.

The president should instead work for peace, with war or other types of aggression only a last resort.