What Masterforger meant is that Hitler did not randomly kill thousands of German for his pleasure or to terrorise the people; "his" people, in his opinion, were able arians, and he generally did not commit crimes against "his" loyal arians. Some people were even selected to breed more people with arian traits. In this aspect, Hitler was not a bad dictator to "his" people.
Hitler needed a scapegoat for Germany's financial problems at the time, he picked the Jews. also, the majority of the holocaust victims were gays, Russians, Polish, Catholics, Christians, disabled, and many other classes of people, not just Jews.
...Ok? ....What does that have to do with my post?
Arrgh, one of the stupidest things I've heard from you 314. Hitler should not even be compared in this country. Nor should Nazis be mentioned, but alas ignorant fools do mention them. Not to be antagonistic of course.
....Yeah, of course, when someone says "Who is the worst dictator ever" you can't answer Hitler. Because. Are you a dunce or something?
Hitler was one of the greatest rulers and dictators known, he lead the German people to greatness, for Germans many lived in an age of utopia. He did great things.
Like killing millions of his own people? Like dragging his country into a war against the rest of the world? What form of utopia has the ashes of humans clouding the air?
Sure you can say he killed Jews, blah blah blah.
\\\\
....He killed millions of people. What god ****ed moron would just offhandedly say "Sure. He was a great leader. He boosted the economy, raised moral, and had a dog. All he did wrong was KILL MILLIONS OF PEOPLE."
He did what he thought was right, he tried to create a better world, what he did was of pure intention.
Oh. So of course that makes it OK that he killed millions of people.
He wanted to have a perfect race on the planet.
What a valiant man, being racist. That defiantly makes it worth killing millions! Good thing he had a good excuse.
He did what he did because he thought it was right.
And he killed millions of people. I don't care if you think that is right, he killed millions of people. There should be no question. Good leaders DON'T GENOCIDE THEIR OWN PEOPLE. If you genocide your own people, you are automatically out of the running for good leader.
Intent does not make it OK. Vision does not make it OK. There is no excuse for genocide.
When you compare him with some African rulers and see how there nations are and the poverty rates + starvation + aids etc..
Which are, of course, the leaders fault. After all, they are not trying to be good leaders or anything?
Oh wait. They did not intentionally genocide their own people. That still makes them better...
They do what they do for no reason, just to advance themselves, they don't help anyone except a select few
Hitler wanted to advanced a select few in the form of a race. He did this by KILLING MILLIONS. You don't just offhandedly ignore the KILLING OF MILLIONS.
How do you compare a man like Hitler to nearly any African ruler.
Jacob Zuma, president of South Africa. He did not genocide his own people. He did not throw his country into a war against the rest of the world. Zuma is better then Hitler. How is he not?
Hitler is an angel compared to them.
Are you high right now?
He tried to do the right thing, he led his people to greatness.
Greatness? He ruled for several years, in which he KILLED MILLIONS OF HIS OWN PEOPLE, declared war against the rest of the world...
Regardless, lets say we are having a discussion about the world's worst parent. If a parent drowns his kids because he is trying to give them a bath, is he a good parent? I say no, but you seem to be saying he was a great parent.
Opposite to many third world leaders, where as nearly all their citizens live in shacks, starve, have aids etc...
Since of course Hitler would never send...I don't know, millions of people, to live in shacks where they starve and disease is rampant? Not some kind of ghetto or something similar. Especially not intentionally, right?
Is ignorance really a bliss 314d1.
I would think so. You seem to be really happy.
His ideals were FOR Germany. Killing millions of people was for having the strongest survive and raise Germany to a ideal utopia. Your only argument is that he killed millions of people from Germany, which is an invalid point because his ideals were for making it a great country, not making it his entire control and rule for him to take over the world.
Parvez musharraf was the worse he prostituted my nation to the west
I prefer him as the leader of Pakistan then the current leader. He wants to return from his "self-exile," whatever that means, and I think he can bring some stability to Pakistan.
Parvez musharraf was the worse he prostituted my nation to the west
I prefer him as the leader of Pakistan than the current leader. He wants to return from his "self-exile," whatever that means, and I think he can bring some real stability to Pakistan.
I prefer him as the leader of Pakistan than the current leader. He wants to return from his "self-exile," whatever that means, and I think he can bring some real stability to Pakistan.
Yeah sure "Self exile" Just like tunisian president.
His ideals were FOR Germany. Killing millions of people was for having the strongest survive and raise Germany to a ideal utopia. Your only argument is that he killed millions of people from Germany, which is an invalid point because his ideals were for making it a great country, not making it his entire control and rule for him to take over the world.
This is stated perfectly. Keep in mind Hitler was a terrible person, he was a monster, considering the way he callously murdered children and babies and I in no way agree with the genocides he committed and how he killed those people.
The reason I believe Hitler was not the worst dictator ever and shouldn't even be mentioned in this thread is because of what Bluydee said. I find someone who kills just to fortify his own position, ignores his country and allows his citizens to starve, live in shanty's and do nothing to help anyone but himself 100 times worse than Hitler. The number of casualties caused by these dictators should be considered irrelevant in my opinion. This is the most important part I think.
[quote]His ideals were FOR Germany
[quote]his ideals were for making it a great country, not making it his entire control and rule for him to take over the world.
This alone should take him out of contention for the worst dictator I believe.
Bowser was a pretty bad lad. He sent all the goombas, turtles, ghosts, ect. to die like it was nothing, just so he could get laid by a chick that wasn't even the same species as him. Pretty jacked if you ask me.
Stalin had one of the highest body counts, sending many men to Siberia to work to death, so you can count him worst for that. Hitler also killed many people, and unlike Stalin, he did it mostly because he just did not like the people he was killing based on race and other such factors. Hitler also killed them more horribly, while Stalin made them work, Hitler often just threw them into ovens or gassed them. It would also be argued that, had Hitler not been stopped, he would have killed more people than Stalin. So either of those two have my vote.
hey 314d1 we actually agreed on something for once!
hey 314d1 we actually agreed on something for once!
not only the people who died in the gulag, but he is also indirectly responsible for soviet losses during the war. He ordered his men not to defend against the Germans in the beginning and he killed all the competent officers right before the war began.
HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM Not hitler he real helped the germans Khadalfi nobody cares Stalin he was pretty ****** but elped russia Vlad Putin not really a dictator Me well im a great dictator of the fluffy bunnies of doom
