“Peace for our time” was spoken by Neville Chamberlain, British PM on Sept 30, 1938 about the Munich Agreement, in which Czechoslovakia was dismembered and raped in absentia, being forced to cede its Sudetenland province to Germany. The international community promoted and supported it enthusiastically. The London Times declared that “no conqueror returning from a victory on the battlefield has come adorned with nobler laurels” than Chamberlain returning from Munich.

The agreement was reinforced by letters from President Roosevelt. A joint declaration by Chamberlain and Hitler stated: “We regard this agreement…as symbolic of the desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again.”

True, there was opposition to the Munich agreement: “You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war,” but it was the lone and isolated voice of Winston Churchill, who also declared in the Commons: “We have sustained a total and unmitigated defeat.” He was forced to pause until the storm of protest against such a remark had subsided.

But people who think more rationally than common folks hailed the pact. Prominent among supporters were scientists, with their superior analytical skills. The editorial of the leading British science journal Nature wrote on Oct 8, 1938:

The British people have expressed their enthusiastic admiration for… Chamberlain, the PM, to secure peace….

The prestigious American journal Science wrote on Oct 7, 1938:

There have been many turning points in history… a more important turning point was the radio address of Mr Chamberlain… a new light was shining and peace in Europe was in the making…For at least a generation it will not be easy for Europe to become involved in a general war…

That piece was written by F.R. Moulton, Permanent Secretary of The American Association for the Advancement of Science.

The rest is history. Half a year after the Munich agreement, Germany invaded the remnants of Czechoslovakia. Another half a year later, Germany invaded Poland and World War II broke out, killing more than 60 million people and destroying a continent.

Did we mention that scientists think more rationally than common folks?

There were once friendly relations between Gaza residents and Israeli citizens. But then the international community and many top Israeli strategists advised Israel to withdraw from Gaza, since it would assure peace in the region.

Israel withdrew totally and unconditionally in 2005. Terror attacks abounded, especially after Hamas overthrew Fatah-Gaza in a brief bloodbath in 2007. At the time, there were a few Churchill-minded people who had predicted this outcome, but nobody heeded their advice.

For quite some time now, the international community has advanced the two-state solution: an Israeli state and a Palestinian state “living side by side in peace.”

I think it’s a good solution. Here is my rational thinking. As the British-German “desire of our two peoples never to go to war with one another again” was rudely broken, so surely will the Hamas covenant to destroy Israel be voided, once Israel is further dismembered and raped by ceding more land. It’s the obstinate wish of Israel not to be flooded with peace-seeking Hamas-ISIS “refugees” that’s an obstacle to peace.

Once the two-state solution is implemented, Hamas won’t again purge Fatah from its positions, this time in the West Bank, thereby endangering the only viable international airport of Israel, only a few miles away. Fatah itself won’t fulfill its vow to never recognize the State of Israel.

On its regional maps, Israel doesn’t exist. Its children are indoctrinated with hate and incitement against Israel from kindergarten on. All of this, along with the global atrocities of extreme Islam, will clearly stop immediately with the two-state solution!

Did I mention that I am a rationally thinking scientist?