OK, I am not one to criticize someone else for stretching an analogy. I do it every day. But, I have to admit, our Secretary of State lost me on this one:
"…It would be like saying that after Adolf Hitler was overthrown, we needed to change then, the resolution that allowed the United States to do that, so that we could deal with creating a stable environment in Europe after he was overthrown."
Please help me with what would be wrong with either case? If Hitler's regime is gone then what would be wrong with changing a resolution, if it brought stability to Europe? I mean, I can hypothesize a bunch of circumstances where it would be a problem, but prima facie I cannot think of why the Hitler analogy works. Can you?