Time Machine: Would you kill Adolf Hitler as a child?

[sivispacem]

I think the people of the Falkland Islands and the Unionist, Protestant citizens of Northern Ireland may disagree there.

[Mr. House]

Sure, but f*ck Margaret Thatcher.

 

I mean the amount of people who would have been somewhat inconvenienced if the Falklands Islands was returned to Argentina is dwarfed by the amount of people who were fisted by the actions of those two.

Edited January 24, 2014 by Nale Dixon

[lil weasel]

 

There was a guy that existed. That much is widely accepted by most scholars.

in all likelihood he just suffered from a rare case of extreme schizophrenia (impossible to diagnose at the time) combined with incredible public speaking ability and impenetrable self-confidence (possibly amplified by the schizo delusions). next thing you know he's got a hooker and an eclectic group of hippies following him around the desert telling everyone that he's the father of the universe and the one-true religion.

 

What would you expect from a child that all his life was being told he was the Son of God. As far as followings take a look as 'his return' (see: Brother Julius, Meriden Connecticut) Edited January 24, 2014 by lil weasel

[Murray Bunyan]

No. Instead I'd reform him to make him be one of the greatest people on earth!

Jokes aside, it's apparent that the majority of the India/Pakistan praises Hitler, which leads me to believe that they are completely oblivious of his depraved acts, I just wanted to hear it from someone who has observed it all so closely. What do you believe?

 

Relevant: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-fuehrer-cult-germans-cringe-at-hitler-s-popularity-in-pakistan-a-683966.html

Edited January 24, 2014 by Murray Bunyan

[Satourn]

If there would be an 'undo' button in time machine, I'd kill him, just to see the effects and then undo the thing I've done. I'd also like to watch what would happen if Hitler actually won in WW2.

[sivispacem]

Sure, but f*ck Margaret Thatcher.

 

I mean the amount of people who would have been somewhat inconvenienced if the Falklands Islands was returned to Argentina is dwarfed by the amount of people who were fisted by the actions of those two.

Granted (subjectively, that's not a debate I can be remotely bothered to have), but my question wasn't really about the balance of good or utilitarianism but about the removal of people whose existence left a solely negative legacy.

 

Like, for instance, can anyone hypothesise any negative connotations for entirely removing Senator Joseph McCarthy from existence?

[Osho]

Jokes aside, it's apparent that the majority of the India/Pakistan praises Hitler, which leads me to believe that they are completely oblivious of his depraved acts, I just wanted to hear it from someone who has observed it all so closely. What do you believe?

Talking about India, but by blaming the people of India you don't realize that Nazi symbol "swastika" is actually a sign of purity and holiness. Rather picking names, you need to understand the cultural orientation of Indians living with any or fully knowledge about the background of Hitler. The biggest reason being the India's education system that's completely ignorant of certain important "facts" of Hitler's history

The majority of people in India is still surviving every day for basic requirements of living more important than going school because of that, in many instances, they are not taught enough to recognize it. I wouldn't deny the fact that still some Indians admire Hitler rather Gandhi mainly because Hitler ruined the economies of Britain and France, and as such, they give much importance to this one fact ignoring his crimes. But such an ignorance prevails or seen in every part of the world, in some or the other way, not just India and not just regarding Hitler.

[Svip]

With all this negative talk of Hitler, I think it is time we recognised good things he did:

 

• Standardised time zones in Europe (France might still be using Paris time today!).
• Made sure most of Europe drove on the right (except the UK and Sweden).
• Rid the world of Charlie Chaplin-moustaches.

[Algonquin Assassin]

I'd raise him as my own then the world would be well and truly f*cked.

[DeafMetal]

I'd raise him as my own then the world would be well and truly f*cked.

CNN Breaking News! Hitler marched on Poland after the President of Poland declared video game Grand Theft Auto IV "boring." Hitler announced he would be performing public executions. Stay tuned at 11.

[EQUIN0X]

Who Wouldn't go back in time and kill Hitler if they had the chance? Gimme a break.....

 

No. Killing a historical figure who changed the course of the world because of selfish personal butthurt reasons is outright foolishness. You might as well assassinate Nero, King Leonidas and Elizabeth Báthory.

 

And, as others have said, most modern technology we have today is because of the Nazis.

 

The Nazis really don't get enough credit for their brilliant scientists and engineers they had.

 

Yeah, the brilliant scientists and engineers that for the most part wanted NOTHING to do with Nazism.

For the most part? I doubt that. Perhaps near the end of the war, but before the start of WWII, I'm sure they were just fine.

 

After all, Germany, thanks to Hitler, had just been restored from a massive depression and unbearable poverty to a thriving new empire, with no unemployment.

 

 

 

How many brilliant men and women were put to death by Nazism merely because of their race?

 

I can't think of many other than Jews, considering black people, Japanese and Muslims were in the Wehrmacht and happily fought alongside the Nazis.

 

 

 

Also, let's not forget about Robert Goddard, an american, and TRUE inventor of rocket science.

 

I don't think anyone's denying that, just merely giving credit where credit is due.

 

EDIT: Damn it, I said I wasn't going to get involved in political talk.

 

Short answer on-topic answer: No.

Edited January 24, 2014 by EQUIN0X

[Graven]

 

I'm not going to be tricked to brake #6 and fry in Hell.

[Murray Bunyan]

 

Jokes aside, it's apparent that the majority of the India/Pakistan praises Hitler, which leads me to believe that they are completely oblivious of his depraved acts, I just wanted to hear it from someone who has observed it all so closely. What do you believe?

Talking about India, but by blaming the people of India you don't realize that Nazi symbol "swastika" is actually a sign of purity and holiness. Rather picking names, you need to understand the cultural orientation of Indians living with any or fully knowledge about the background of Hitler. The biggest reason being the India's education system that's completely ignorant of certain important "facts" of Hitler's history

The majority of people in India is still surviving every day for basic requirements of living more important than going school because of that, in many instances, they are not taught enough to recognize it. I wouldn't deny the fact that still some Indians admire Hitler rather Gandhi mainly because Hitler ruined the economies of Britain and France, and as such, they give much importance to this one fact ignoring his crimes. But such an ignorance prevails or seen in every part of the world, in some or the other way, not just India and not just regarding Hitler.

 

Excellent reading comprehension, would you kindly direct me to that exact line where I stated anything about the swastika symbol? Picking names?

 

It seems to me that you just skimmed my post rather poorly and assumed I had no knowledge of Hinduism or other religious or cultural systems that are practiced in India. If you deliberately skipped on the article that I posted earlier, I advise that you read it so that you may comprehend what I was trying to express.

 

Again - relevant:

 

Edited January 25, 2014 by Murray Bunyan

[Osho]

Excellent reading comprehension, would you kindly direct me to that exact line where I stated anything about the swastika symbol? Picking names?

 

It seems to me that you just skimmed my post rather poorly and assumed I had no knowledge of Hinduism or other religious or cultural systems that are practiced in India. If you deliberately skipped on the article that I posted earlier, I advise that you read it so that you may comprehend what I was trying to express.

 

Your reply to the original quote, was by relating to what generally a belief around among "India" (in specific) about Hitler for different reasons. This was not necessary, because Ace simply replied to the topic.

I'm not sure how you got the idea that he did praise or admire, in reality, it's not proper by associating his example (even if he does admire) easily with what generally, Indians praise or believe. I tried to explain that it's NOT applicable by your logic.

There's always something like this happening. Basically, some people pick some random opinions and tag it with the "majority" of the country or nation, as seen in your reply. You may post as many articles you find on the web but that won't form the "majority" of any nation or country. Obviously, it's not the right way to judge it.

[Murray Bunyan]

 

 

Excellent reading comprehension, would you kindly direct me to that exact line where I stated anything about the swastika symbol? Picking names?

 

 

It seems to me that you just skimmed my post rather poorly and assumed I had no knowledge of Hinduism or other religious or cultural systems that are practiced in India. If you deliberately skipped on the article that I posted earlier, I advise that you read it so that you may comprehend what I was trying to express.

Your reply to the original quote, was by relating to what generally a belief around among "India" (in specific) about Hitler for different reasons. This was not necessary, because Ace simply replied to the topic.

I'm not sure how you got the idea that he did praise or admire, in reality, it's not proper by associating his example (even if he does admire) easily with what generally, Indians praise or believe. I tried to explain that it's NOT applicable by your logic.

There's always something like this happening. Basically, some people pick some random opinions and tag it with the "majority" of the country or nation, as seen in your reply. You may post as many articles you find on the web but that won't form the "majority" of any nation or country. Obviously, it's not the right way to judge it.

 

"I'm not sure how you got the idea that he did praise or admire" Your reading comprehension clicked, again. I asked him what his thoughts were on the matter. There is no my "logic" as I never intended to create or show it in my statement. I do, however, admit that my premise was a baseless one. But it's an objective thing, your opinion doesn't matter, either. Edited January 25, 2014 by sivispacem

[Osho]

I do, however, admit that my premise was a baseless one. But it's an objective thing, your opinion doesn't matter, either.

This is the reason. Clearly, you belong to the category making baseless premises, picking random web sources and ask others what they think about it.

You properly ended the argument accepting it, thus lost all credibility further.

In the end, you still aren't able to further explain how "majority" of India praises the said person??

[lt_yao]

Have we learned nothing from Dr. Who?

[Murray Bunyan]

 

I do, however, admit that my premise was a baseless one. But it's an objective thing, your opinion doesn't matter, either.

This is the reason. Clearly, you belong to the category making baseless premises, picking random web sources and ask others what they think about it.

You properly ended the argument accepting it, thus lost all credibility further.

In the end, you still aren't able to further explain how "majority" of India praises the said person??

 

Are you implying that you had any credibility to begin with? I knew I was I was arguing with a person who, instead of countering with a solid statement, pathetically tries to read my statement then misinterprets it and blames it all on me.

 

The thing is, my post was never directed at you, yet you love to participate in conversations that do not involve you, you made a fool of yourself. I do not owe you any further explanation as I already admitted earlier.

[Vercetti42]

 

No. Instead I'd reform him to make him be one of the greatest people on earth!

Jokes aside, it's apparent that the majority of the India/Pakistan praises Hitler, which leads me to believe that they are completely oblivious of his depraved acts, I just wanted to hear it from someone who has observed it all so closely. What do you believe?

 

Relevant: http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/the-fuehrer-cult-germans-cringe-at-hitler-s-popularity-in-pakistan-a-683966.html

 

 

Honestly, I haven't seen anyone who actually praises Hitler in India and I did not know about it until you pointed out the article. And my point about reforming Hitler was actually serious.

 

If you're asking about my opinion about Hitler, let's put it this way:

 

Hitler as a soldier/strategist - Yes.

Hitler as a Person - No.

Edited January 26, 2014 by AceKingston

[Osho]

 

 

I do, however, admit that my premise was a baseless one. But it's an objective thing, your opinion doesn't matter, either.

 

This is the reason. Clearly, you belong to the category making baseless premises, picking random web sources and ask others what they think about it.

You properly ended the argument accepting it, thus lost all credibility further.

In the end, you still aren't able to further explain how "majority" of India praises the said person??

 

.... instead of countering with a solid statement, pathetically tries to read my statement then misinterprets it and blames it all on me.I'm not blaming you instead trying to point out all the while your baseless premise by making you accept for it and eventually you ended up being grossly let down by your own irresponsible statement with no proper reasoning in support. You continuously finding faults in me rather understanding the cause of the argument by such childish (baseless) claim put forward by you.

It doesn't matter were you asking me or not, since I never tried or had any intention to offend you.

Next time don't speak about things you don't know.

Discussion closed.

Edited January 26, 2014 by Osho

[sivispacem]

Hitler as a soldier/strategist - Yes.

 

Hitler was an atrocious strategist. All was relatively fine and dandy for the Wehrmacht up until Hitler began interfering directly with strategic and operation decision-making. The fact the idiot overruled Heinz Guderian, who was probably the finest strategic mind in the whole of the Western world circa 1943 and Inspector General of Armoured Troops, speaks volumes about his military leadership.

[theadmiral]

 

 

Hitler as a soldier/strategist - Yes.

 

 

Hitler as a soldier/strategist? That is pretty laughable. It's well known the man was militarily inept and any success he enjoyed came from the brilliant generals behind him such as the Desert Fox and several others.

 

If you are going to pick a redeeming quality, the only one that seems viable is as a charismatic speaker with the ability to inspire the masses.

[CatDog96]

If I had a time machine I'd go back one day with the winning lotto numbers.

Edited January 26, 2014 by CatDog96

[ryuclan]

I don't know if I would kill Hitler as a child. Only because I don't know exactly how things would have turned out had he not done what he done. If he didn't lead so many people to become what they were who's to say someone else more convincing, more strategic and more resilient wouldn't have taken his place?

[EQUIN0X]

If I had a time machine I'd go back one day with the winning lotto numbers.

Absolutely this.

 

Nice Raid sig, by the way.

[lil weasel]

I don't know if I would kill Hitler as a child. Only because I don't know exactly how things would have turned out had he not done what he done. If he didn't lead so many people to become what they were who's to say someone else more convincing, more strategic and more resilient wouldn't have taken his place?

That's basically what I said. And, then this was posted:

 

 

sivispacem, on 23 Jan 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:

You are sure based on what? The simple fact of the matter was that the NSDAP were united around the figure of Hitler and he was about the only part of the organisation capable of gaining public traction. Hence their astounding lack of success before his intervention, at a time when other alternative movements like Socialism and Communism were far more popular.

 

If you're so convinced that the NSDAP could have succeeded without Hitler why don't you explain this conviction and what makes you so confident in it, with reference to other senior figures in the German far right movement between 1928 and 1933, their public image and popularity in contrast to mainstream and alternative political forces of the time?

[sivispacem]

Actually what you said was that it was categorical fact that someone of equal political standing and with the same aggressive, violent would have replaced Hitler. I merely pointed out that much of the political success of the NSDAP was based on Hitler himself and the surrounding cult of personality.

 

Sometimes I wonder if you're so obtuse in the rest of your life or whether you just reserve it for your persons on this forum.

[lil weasel]

No, I am sure that if Herr Hitler wasn't the leader someone of the other Politicos would have taken his place. The situation was in the minds of too many People for it to not reach the Flash Point.

Actually what you said was that it was categorical fact that someone of equal political standing and with the same aggressive, violent would have replaced Hitler. I merely pointed out that much of the political success of the NSDAP was based on Hitler himself and the surrounding cult of personality.

 

Sometimes I wonder if you're so obtuse in the rest of your life or whether you just reserve it for your persons on this forum.

 

What "I" said was, "I am sure that if Herr Hitler wasn't the leader someone of the other Politicos would have taken his place."

Does anyone else see the 'aggressive' difference?

 

Do you always have to take 'pot shots' when you don't agree with opinions? Also, your compulsive obsession to 'correct' reminds so much of the TV character "Dr. Sheldon Cooper". You both seem so alike ...

At least your vile language has been blunted.

Edited January 26, 2014 by lil weasel

[sivispacem]

"Sure" That's certainty.

 

Let's not forget that you're the one making cheap shots up there ^. Hypocrite.

[Svip]

This excellent article should provide you with all your Hitler-time machine related needs.