Would You Fight Hitler?

[Narol]

It's unfortunate, but to this day there are people like Hitler all over the world doing the same type of things he did.

It's unfortunate that Hitler gets all the negative "ZOMG MOST EVIL PERSON EVER" press that he does. It takes attention away from the people who did far worse things than he did. He just did it so very memorably.

Edit: Fixed my laughably bad bbcode.

[Zoolander]

Idk man, far worse? Who the fuck has done far worse? The only people with the potential to be in the same league as Hitler are Mao, and Stalin. I guess Mao doesn't really get the proper recognition he deserves, although a lot of the famine deaths under him were from straight up idiocy. Suppose Ghenkis Khan could be up there too, although the numbers are pretty difficult to really know.

Now if you wanna talk about contemporaries that don't get their due...well Al Bashir would be a great name drop. Hardly far worse than Hitler though.

[Darus Grey]

Three biggest reasons Germany lost:

Hitler was insane, pretty much the catalyst to every failure. The Germany military did exceptionally well DESPITE his leadership, not in anyway because of it.

They didn't build more submarines, if they had started off with 200-400 like some generals wanted, they would have destroyed every European country except Russia. At this period in time no country had effective counters to the submarine, any boat in the water was free game, but they simply didn't have enough for a 100%~ effective blockade, though they did massive damage with what they did have.

They didn't pursue the bomb because they didn't think it was a good idea...lol.
America only was able to develop it because a plethora of German scientists defected or sold state secrets from the German's atomic weapon development program when it was clear that it was going no-where and popular support for Hitler was failing within the military. Had this not happened, they could of had the bomb as early was 1937~ and ruled the world based on fear alone.

Other minor failures like they should of built their gigantic Rail-Gun, even if it was vulnerable to attack due to it's power requirements, they could of fortified and attacked any position in the European continent, the forces it would of freed up would more of compensated for the air presence needed to defend it.

Idk man, far worse? Who the fuck has done far worse? The only people with the potential to be in the same league as Hitler are Mao, and Stalin. I guess Mao doesn't really get the proper recognition he deserves, although a lot of the famine deaths under him were from straight up idiocy. Suppose Ghenkis Khan could be up there too, although the numbers are pretty difficult to really know.

Now if you wanna talk about contemporaries that don't get their due...well Al Bashir would be a great name drop. Hardly far worse than Hitler though.

More people die in the US from poor healthcare policy. Narol is right, he is only a famous villain because he did it in a memorable way.
If you start looking at people in influential positions who directly or indirectly kill people via means besides just violence, he's not very big on the list.

[Kuya]

Every white person who isn't a jew secretly wishes the germans had won so they wouldn't have to deal with all the problems that come with darkies.

[Rhyis.]

Every white person who isn't a jew secretly wishes the germans had won so they wouldn't have to deal with all the problems that come with darkies.

Tarantino has our backs.
http://media.ebaumsworld.com/mediaFi...756/637383.jpg

[Darus Grey]

Every white person who isn't a jew secretly wishes the germans had won so they wouldn't have to deal with all the problems that come with darkies.

Naw, the Jews too. The only reason they were persecuted was because, like America, they control a pretty disproportionate amount of wealth compared to their population. It was merely a money grab by the government.

If they had joined Hitler instead of using their resources to oppose him, they could of been united in their hatred of the darkies.

I have met several Jews with the above opinion ^

[Zoolander]

More people die in the US from poor healthcare policy. Narol is right, he is only a famous villain because he did it in a memorable way.
If you start looking at people in influential positions who directly or indirectly kill people via means besides just violence, he's not very big on the list.

This is a silly tangent, but that is bull shit. What single individual ever decided US healthcare policy? And where does free will factor into these numbers being pulled outta thin air.

If you wanna get into this shit then lets do it right. Maybe we can talk about whoever the fuckface was that decided to split up people into Hutu and Tutsi. Can pin a few million deaths on him. Or maybe we should start including diseases like the plague or AIDS, they have feelings too after all! I mean if you are gunna discuss things in such a gray area, might as well go all the way. Lets talk about whoever that first human was, because that mother fucker set in motion a chain of events that would lead to billions of deaths.

[Plow]

More people die in the US from poor healthcare policy. Narol is right, he is only a famous villain because he did it in a memorable way.
If you start looking at people in influential positions who directly or indirectly kill people via means besides just violence, he's not very big on the list.

Hitler was directly responsible for... probably about 30 million enemy soldiers and civilians, and then a good 8 mil or more of the Axis's losses.

[Narol]

Lets talk about whoever that first human was, because that mother fucker set in motion a chain of events that would lead to billions of deaths.

That's a hilariously shortsighted argument. There's a very large difference between being the political leader of a nation, thus being responsible for atrocities that kill millions, and "when you have a child you're condemning him to death."

You also can't define how atrocious someone was/is solely by how many people they're responsible for killing. The methods and reasons behind their atrocities also play a part. Simply accepting Hitler as some kind of Satan incarnate, an evil to end all evils, and to use a line I have saved but of which I can't remember the source, is "to somehow dehumanize them, turn all the players into demons and monsters, the same techniques used by the Nazis themselves to target and exterminate Jews and other undesirables. To dehumanize Nazis is to turn them into archetypes as opposed to functioning humans; it sets us up to be "surprised" again when traits of the Nazis show up elsewhere, in other places, at a lessened level but with the same misguided goals and logic behind them." Nothing the Nazis did was especially new, conceptually. Just ramped up to 11 and presented very powerfully.

tl;dr Hitler was a functional human being. Knee-jerk reactions to his name and thinking of him as some evil-to-end-all-evils Satan incarnate is lazy and stupid.

[Tacticus]

Well, logically speaking, if I were to live in that era, there's a good chance that I would not be able to discern like I do today on the extent of Hitler's war crimes. This is the era before the Internet and cell phone cameras; it's highly unlikely that I would know that he's been systematically murdering millions of people.

But what if I do know what he's been doing? Well then, that depends on where I am; if I'm living in Poland, for example, I might be inclined to fight evil (this of course depends on several other variables, such as the likelihood of my family being put to death for being related to a Partisan member, if anyone can shame me enough to take action, etc.)

But yeah, I guess I'm too much of a coward to take on the might of the Wehrmacht. I'm no hero.

[Max™]

We like our enemies to be a certain way. A way that doesn't reflect on us. So you have to sell the war. The victims have to be the to our liking. Then, it's all gung-ho, saving the 'free world' and all that.

Tell a Filipino who was alive at the turn of the 20th century that nothing being done by Hitler reflects on the U.S. in any way.

[Corresapolonia]

Naw, the Jews too. The only reason they were persecuted was because, like America, they control a pretty disproportionate amount of wealth compared to their population. It was merely a money grab by the government.

If they had joined Hitler instead of using their resources to oppose him, they could of been united in their hatred of the darkies.

I have met several Jews with the above opinion ^

reason for Jews having that much of money back when was because they were not allowed to do anything else back then. I mean before Third Reich. They had just a small choice of what to do later on in their life so most of them went to become people that handle a lot with money.

Now as for me Hitler is a thing i never get loose. Was in California in 1999 as a Exchange pupil. Grandpa of their family asked if Hitler has been put to jail yet. And as it seemed like everyone in the school had no clue that i don't want to deal with this Nazi shit all the time. (like random people that knew who i was raise their right hand and say the "famous" words).

Would a great pack of people enlist outside Germany to fight this evil creature? sure a lot would do. But with the typical mindset that people have today they couln't care less. There's so much evil in the world right now that we can't really decide what to see and what to ingore. A Big pile of people always need a "bad face" someone they can identify. A whole nation? they can't be all that bad. there's gotta be that one guy that controls everything and he needs to be taken down. Humans in general tend to fuck everything up by coming to conclusions too fast.

And besides: thanks IBM! helping to make the holocaust more efficient.

to topic: would i fight against him? Not in my early years in germany that's for sure. you grow up in a systemised way and you get trained what to think and in what to believe in.
Would i join an underground group to fight against him?
- everyone and their cocksucking mom would say yes but they wouldnt so would i. If i knew what he did: i'd leave the country with my family if they want to come along.

[Zoolander]

That's a hilariously shortsighted argument. There's a very large difference between being the political leader of a nation, thus being responsible for atrocities that kill millions, and "when you have a child you're condemning him to death."

You also can't define how atrocious someone was/is solely by how many people they're responsible for killing. The methods and reasons behind their atrocities also play a part. Simply accepting Hitler as some kind of Satan incarnate, an evil to end all evils, and to use a line I have saved but of which I can't remember the source, is "to somehow dehumanize them, turn all the players into demons and monsters, the same techniques used by the Nazis themselves to target and exterminate Jews and other undesirables. To dehumanize Nazis is to turn them into archetypes as opposed to functioning humans; it sets us up to be "surprised" again when traits of the Nazis show up elsewhere, in other places, at a lessened level but with the same misguided goals and logic behind them." Nothing the Nazis did was especially new, conceptually. Just ramped up to 11 and presented very powerfully.

tl;dr Hitler was a functional human being. Knee-jerk reactions to his name and thinking of him as some evil-to-end-all-evils Satan incarnate is lazy and stupid.

No way, this is ground breaking stuff here. I cant believe you actually took that stupid metaphor seriously jesus christ lol. Who the hell here is making a counter argument to anything in your second paragraph, or do you just liked to debate and discuss with yourself? Of course reasoning, methods, and intent all play into it.

And you've yet to actually throw out any names for your little hypothesis that there are many who did "far worse" than Hitler. I mean I guess I see where your coming from...Hitlers intent and methods were pretty noble, hes just misunderstood. Poor guy So as fun as unsubstantiated and un-backed claims are, be so kind as to enlighten us or gtfo.

[Narol]

I mean I guess I see where your coming from...Hitlers intent and methods were pretty noble, hes just misunderstood.

Yes.

So as fun as unsubstantiated and un-backed claims are, be so kind as to enlighten us or gtfo.

No.

Who the hell here is making a counter argument to anything in your second paragraph, or do you just liked to debate and discuss with yourself?

I was bored.

And besides: thanks IBM! helping to make the holocaust more efficient.

Don't forget Ford. The guy's been bowdlerized into some kind of great American hero, but he was more anti-semitic than most people figure.

Would a great pack of people enlist outside Germany to fight this evil creature? sure a lot would do. But with the typical mindset that people have today they couln't care less. There's so much evil in the world right now that we can't really decide what to see and what to ingore.

If the situation were somehow to repeat itself, if today's youth didn't know the full extent of Hitler's atrocities and saw him just as some kind of Kim Jong-Il of the day (supposedly crazy dictator of a far-off nation), I agree, most wouldn't really care that much. Hindsight is 20/20, and only in hindsight do we see that Hitler really was as bad as he was.

To wit, 50 years from now there might be a modern-day dictator whose name gets tossed around with high amounts of sensationalism, with a similar-reading article that says the youth of the day wouldn't enlist to fight him, and so on and so forth.

[Tymon]

If you want to get literal, which no one is being, I wouldn't have a choice, probably.

There was a draft for WWII, and if there was a global war in which the entirety of Europe or otherwise was under siege, there would probably be another draft.

If there was no draft, somehow, and the conflict was of comparable size and interest, then yes, probably. If my country made a stand against whatever atrocities someone was committing, I would stand with my country.

I use the word atrocities because the term can be very loose. Controversial issues that some may share differing opinions of are usually not coined "atrocities"

I don't think anyone on here sans trolls would say that the murder of millions of people is legitimate and acceptable behavior

[Penthesilea]

Idk man, far worse? Who the fuck has done far worse? The only people with the potential to be in the same league as Hitler are Mao, and Stalin. I guess Mao doesn't really get the proper recognition he deserves, although a lot of the famine deaths under him were from straight up idiocy. Suppose Ghenkis Khan could be up there too, although the numbers are pretty difficult to really know.

Now if you wanna talk about contemporaries that don't get their due...well Al Bashir would be a great name drop. Hardly far worse than Hitler though.

Pol Pot (Khmer Rouge) anywhere from 1-4m killed in Cambodia.

[Churchill]

Fight the Fuhrer? Newp.

[Rhyis.]

I bet a lot of people would fight Ghandi though.

[Plow]

No, in hindisght, but realistically yes, without.

I also wander about this... why no in hindsight?

I think I'd have been less likely to volunteer at the time with as little information as was possible to be available then.


Having seen the Holocaust museum, though... absolutely, no question.

[Bokey]

I bet a lot of people would fight Ghandi though.

Im down Double team ftw!