Writing in The Hill on September 9, 2013, Brent Budowsky suggested that President Obama was the equivalent of Winston Churchill facing down Adolf Hitler in his desire attack Syria and that, by implication, Sen. Ted Cruz, along with fellow Republican Sen. Rand Paul and Democrat Rep. Alan Grayson, was Neville Chamberlain.
“Read them carefully. Listen to them closely. They have nothing coherent to say. They suggest nothing effective to do. By contrast, President Obama has taken the initiative and offers a course of action that will send a message to Bashar Assad and reduce his capability of using chemical weapons for mass murder against innocent people.
“As far as Paul and Cruz are concerned, they are in heated competition with each other for GOP caucus voters in Iowa in 2016. But ask them what they would do to stop the carnage and they offer nothing — zero — that would stop the carnage. “
In fact Cruz has offered an alternate strategy, but going further, one wonders about an analogy that casts Obama as Churchill and Assad, as murderous as he is, as Hitler.
The rhetoric coming from Obama’s mouth is hardly Churchillian, as when the British prime minister declared:
“we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender—“
Nor is Obama's current grabbing at Vladimir Putin's offer of a diplomatic solution something Churchill would have done.
Of course Assad is not trying to take over the world nor is he bombing American cities as Hitler bombed London and Coventry. It seems that once again Godwin’s Law, which states that the first person to mention Hitler and Nazism in an argument, has lost, has been transgressed.
As for Obama as Churchill, perhaps the analogy is apt, but just in the wrong world war. Churchill was the architect of a military disaster in the First World War at a place called Gallipoli, not that far away from Syria. Hundreds of thousands of Australian, New Zealand, and British soldiers were slaughtered in that battle for no purpose. That is just a thought for anyone who wraps themselves in the mantle of Churchill to justify military adventures.