Here's a "What if" Scenario for You...
Return of the Ayatolla.
The Fruits of Appeasement [click to read] by Victor Davis Hanson in City Journal
"Imagine a different November 4, 1979, in Teheran. Shortly after Iranian terrorists storm the American embassy and take some 90 American hostages, President Jimmy Carter announces that Islamic fundamentalism is not a legitimate response to the excess of the Shah but a new and dangerous fascism that threatens all that liberal society holds dear. And then he issues an ultimatum to Teheran’s leaders: Release the captives or face a devastating military response" -- Victor Davis Hanson
History, unfortunately, has a tendency to repeat itself. In the 1930's many saw appeasement as the way to deal with Hitler's, ym"sh, ambitions on neighboring countries. As Hanson points out so well, appeasement emboldens tyrants to move more decisively toward their stated goals. In 1926 Mein Kampf was published and if you took in what Hitler wrote the resulting death of six million people would not surprise you. The 'Final Solution' was detailed long before it became horrible reality. Perhaps it was so unbelievable to comprehend that even its existence in print did not deter the appeasers.
Indeed, the history of the Twentieth Century sadly makes Hanson's point. While there may be any number of reasons to pursue appeasement, the result has repeatedly been more carnage than would have resulted from decisive action: "military deterrence and the willingness to use force against evil in its infancy usually end up, in the terrible arithmetic of war, saving more lives than they cost."
Tehran today continues to issue threats to annhilalate both Israel and the United States in an eerie contemporary manifestation of the 'final solution.' The stakes are the same as those in the 1930's. Ball possession, to use a sports analogy, is in the hands of the appeasers.
Update: Binyamin L. Jolkovsky of Jewish World Review has this to say:
President's Latest Bizarre Attempt at Outreach [click to read].