I'm guessing you are no more prepared to provide a clear definition for "appeasment" than that nitwit, Kevin James, who made such a fool of himself on Hardball.
So, I'll help you just a little: "Appeasment" does not mean talking with our adversaries. If it did, that would make GW Bush an appeaser for talking with North Korea (remember the "axis of evil"?) or Iran, or Reagan for talking with Gorbachev.
Words have actual meanings. Republicans got a lot of mileage over the past decade or so by daily re-parsings of simple words and phrases (think "pre-emptive war", "WMD", "torture"). I believe that has jumped the shark now.
For my own part, I think ANY politician who's laboring to re-parse simple words is a politician who is a) deeply cynical and immoral, and b) lying to you. I have similar feelings about any politician who says words are "just words".
We will not be voting for JFK, nor for Jesus, nor for God. We will be voting for human beings we hope might have the intelligence and character to make good decisions in the absence of perfect information.
And I REALLY hope President Obama can get America free of this "Emperial Presidency" that has so terribly damaged our political will.