The same principle applies. If they compare something to the Nazis, it usually means they know nothing about history.
How about this to add a little bit of thought whenever a US politician says the word "appeasement"?
Britain - one of many countries (including the USA) that didn't really want another war with Germany after the Great War. Hence the British enthusiasm for peace accords.
Chamberlain - the guy who recognised the threat of Hitler to free countries but who gave peace a chance.
Chamberlain - the guy who carefully drew a line in the sand over Poland once he realised Hitler was untrustworthy.
Chamberlain - the guy who pursued the rearmament process in Britain ("[I]t would be madness for the country to stop rearming until we were convinced that other countries would act in the same way. For the time being, therefore, we should relax no particle of effort until our deficiencies had been made good.")
Chamberlain - the guy honourable enough and brave enough to declare war on Hitler when he crossed the line in the sand even though the British had not been attacked and weren't yet sufficiently equipped to win a war with Hitler.
The Battle of Britain - the means by which Britain saved its arse from a German invasion before the United States entered the war.
History - Usually, not so much the recording of a narrative of good versus evil.
| 
