Mantu and B5 Shadows

Status
Not open for further replies.
Highly unlikely? I think not. Then again, I ask you mpanty, have YOU helped a lady across the street?

Funny that Hitler is portrayed as evil in every single context. Its a joke. Yes, he did order acts of genocide, but that doesn't mean that he was utterly and completely evil in every single point of his life.

He was awarded with the Iron Cross for his actions on the front in WW1. Now, is that evil? As I am guessing you are non-German, you'd probably say it is as he was against the Allies in WW1. So what does that make the Allies then? Completely good too because they were killing those from the Central Powers?

Besides, if you were to take into context the leaders of the time in their personal actions and not take into account wartimes acts, you would arrive with something different. I paraphrase from a letter sent into The Sunday Times (here in West Australia). It basically said that there were three leaders; one an adulterer, one a wife beating drunk, and another who had only one wife and was a non drinker, non smoker.

It turned out that these people were Roosevelt, Churchill and Hitler, in that order. Theres some food for thought...
 
Originally posted by redwolf
Highly unlikely? I think not. Then again, I ask you mpanty, have YOU helped a lady across the street?

Funny that Hitler is portrayed as evil in every single context. Its a joke. Yes, he did order acts of genocide, but that doesn't mean that he was utterly and completely evil in every single point of his life.

He was awarded with the Iron Cross for his actions on the front in WW1. Now, is that evil? As I am guessing you are non-German, you'd probably say it is as he was against the Allies in WW1. So what does that make the Allies then? Completely good too because they were killing those from the Central Powers?

Besides, if you were to take into context the leaders of the time in their personal actions and not take into account wartimes acts, you would arrive with something different. I paraphrase from a letter sent into The Sunday Times (here in West Australia). It basically said that there were three leaders; one an adulterer, one a wife beating drunk, and another who had only one wife and was a non drinker, non smoker.

It turned out that these people were Roosevelt, Churchill and Hitler, in that order. Theres some food for thought...
Click to expand...

All I can say is that evil people do not only commit acts of evil but they are still evil. Hitler is the pinacle of evil in every way.
 
Originally posted by Napoleon
All I can say is that evil people do not only commit acts of evil but they are still evil. Hitler is the pinacle of evil in every way.
Click to expand...

Except when he's not...:)

How much do you actually know about Hitler, other than the 5th grade "Hitler is not cool, children"?
 
Pinnacle of evil in every way?

Wasn't your namesake almost there? After all, he did commit would be termed now, Crimes against Peace, Crimes against Humanity and various war crimes including fighting an aggressive war. (Hmmm, would that make JFK/Johnson/Nixon guilty for Vietnam?)

How about Stalin? How about all the European kings and monarchs of the ages? How about the English colonists all over the world? How about Saddam (although probably on equal guilt as George Bush)

Funny that Napoleon...why don't you broaden your horizons a bit and perhaps question whats told to you as fact!

One of the only nations not to have started an aggressive war is Australia. I'm proud of that :)
 
Anyone who thinks another race is superior to others, and makes his whole life's purpose "to increase living space for his own superior race", by killing millions of innocents, not considered "pure", is certainly EVIL!

Originally posted by redwolf
Then again, I ask you mpanty, have YOU helped a lady across the street?
Click to expand...

I don't see in ANY WAY how this has to do with the issue, and what it is to YOU, but as a matter of fact no, I haven't helped an old lady across the street.

But perhaps it might interest you, that I have spent nearly two months in a French association for homeless people, called the Restos du Coeur, helping to serve them food and providing them with moral support, and that whenever I have the occasion, I help homeless people in the street for change...

But again, I don't see how that is important to YOU...

Originally posted by redwolf
I paraphrase from a letter sent into The Sunday Times (here in West Australia). It basically said that there were three leaders; one an adulterer, one a wife beating drunk, and another who had only one wife and was a non drinker, non smoker.

It turned out that these people were Roosevelt, Churchill and Hitler, in that order. Theres some food for thought...
Click to expand...

I have read that letter redwolf. And indeed, it makes you think about judging people before you know them...
So I suggest you do the same thing...
 
I don't understand helping old ladies across the street -- I mean, how do you do that? And why do they need help crossing the street? How is it different from walking on the sidewalk?
 
Originally posted by mpanty
Anyone who thinks another race is superior to others, and makes his whole life's purpose "to increase living space for his own superior race", by killing millions of innocents, not considered "pure", is certainly EVIL!

Well, hasn't that occured throughout history? I give you examples, the Roman Empire, the British Empire, the Ottoman Empire, the Russian Empire, The French Empire, The Japanese Empire, the list continues....

I don't see in ANY WAY how this has to do with the issue, and what it is to YOU, but as a matter of fact no, I haven't helped an old lady across the street.

Well, weren't you the one who was foolish enough to comment on it in the first place? If you didn't want me to question whether you have helped an old lady, YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE COMMENTED ON IT IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!

As for you reading that letter, what, do you live here in WA?
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
I don't understand helping old ladies across the street -- I mean, how do you do that? And why do they need help crossing the street? How is it different from walking on the sidewalk?
Click to expand...

Well there may be a lot of nasty people trying to run them down like in Carmageddon :(

I don't exactly see how we can protect them from a ton and a half of metal travelling at 100kph, but at least we can try :)
 
NOW I AM PISSED OFF THAT ANYONE WOULD HAVE THE GAUL TO EVEN SUGGEST THAT NAPOLEON WAS REMOTELY ON THE SAME LEVEL AS HITLER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I also know quite a bit more about hitler than 5th grade "hiter is not cool" as you so aptly put it since I am an avide viewer or the history channel and alot of their material is WWII based material I know quite a bit and "Pinacle of evil" works quite well, starting a war that would kill 20 million russians several million brits several hundred thousand french several hundred thousand americans, no to mention 6 million people killed in a genocide that served no purpose other than propoganda to increase his party's power by playing on civilian hatred greed and insecurities. Napoleon on the other hand, did fight wars, but most he did not start. Several he did but many were attacks on his forces that were launched by other governments (mostly England, Austria, and Prussia) against Republican and later Imperial France. I also must point out that just because a person makes war, they are not a war criminal. If that was the case every soldier, and every world leader that the time of any war ever falls into that catagory. I also must point out the many long term goods that napoleon did: Founded many acadamys of science and art, found rosetta stone (soldiers under his command during the Egypt campaign, in the Armee de L'orient), created a legal code that is still used in some form in many countries across the world (and in lousisiana as well), created the current western way of numbering buildings on roads(yes I know a minor item), had many works of art comishioned, gathered large amounts of data while in Egypt about many things (he was a member of the acadamy that he formed in egypt that studied many items). He also never once committed any act of genocide.
I would ask anyond to present 1 long term good thing that hitler EVER did.

"Funny that Napoleon...why don't you broaden your horizons a bit and perhaps question whats told to you as fact! "
I have never once taken anything anybody ever said about anything important as fact without doing some research into it myself, I am a skeptic so in otherwords SHOVE IT!!!
To even think of comparing a lunatic madman to arguably the greatest military leader since Alexander the great is simply senseless and I shall not stand for it.

Now back to the original topic, Hitler was evil as are probably 1/2 of the human race. I just tend to see him as moreso for as much as any one man could do, bringing about the deaths of more people in 1 war than any other war EVER. and that is just the european war. Add that to committing the largest Genocide ever and using slave labor on a mass scale with civilians. If anyone says he is not evil, then I would like to know what your definition of evil is.

In short, to all those who this applies to GO TO HELL, Good day sirs and madams
 
Napoleon you forgot over 6 millions dead Germans (not counting the deads in Asia) and the Britains lost less than 500000 soldiers and civilians combined.
And I heard never sth good about the History channel...

But I would neither go as far as to put Hitler on the same level as Napoleon. Napoleon did establish the Code Napoleon in Europe which was a very good thing, can't say Hitler did sth like this. Although I find the term "evil" not appropriate for this matter I would consider Hitler "eviler" than Napoleon, that is for sure. But Napoleon (and most other regents) DID start wars and there were innocents killed in his name, so I would not glorify him.

[Edited by Mekt-Hakkikt on 03-18-2001 at 04:56]
 
Remember, Napoleon was also a dictator and was around at the time of the French revolution. Obviously he would have had a part in having the Royal Family....removed, shall we say?

Name one good thing Hitler did? Autobahns. He had them built. He ordered the construction of the "people's car", the Volkswagen. He removed the French invaders/occupiers who had taken control of the Rhineland. There's three.

Now, I didn't say Hitler wasn't evil, but there are ALWAYS two sides to the coin. Put it this way, in a modern war crimes tribunal, Napoleon Bonaparte would be charged with warcrimes. Aggressive wars have a certain charge imposed (I'm not completely sure what it is). As Napoleon was captured (unlike so many of today's war criminals), he would have faced the same wrath. However, back then they merely 'exiled' him.

No need to get worked up Napoleon. Those that do not listen to anyone's ideals or criticisms other than their own have a special name. They are called, fanatics.
 
Napoleon had no part in the Reign of terror. This is a well known fact, at the time he was a minor military officer and held no part into it. And dictator is extreme, he was the First Consol under the republic and then after he gained enough support on the home front he crowned himself emporer, with the full suport of france.

BTW: Napoleon is a person who I look up to for many things, but I am not so blind as to not realize that even he committed mistakes and some bad acts. But I look up and study him as much for the mistakes as for the good so that when I make my world domination bid I will not end up like him, exiled and depressed.
 
Nephilims

Why the Kilrathi fought every single race they encounterd can be seen in WCP where it is told that a kilrathi but not kilrathi will set the world a blaze... not excact quote so my theory is that the Kilrathi waged war because of the propecy of sivar

Hitler was or wasent evil he reunited Germany built autobahs etc etc...

ordered mass genocides etc etc...
used slaves behaved like a human being in general

so make it clear Hitler Churchilll roosevel where just pawns in a big chess game the only diffrance is that if germany won they and the nazism would have been the good side...

not to mention Stalin who sent several millions of his own people into "reedjucation camps in siberia" most of them never appeared again

and USA dropped 2 Atomic Bomb's on Japan if that isnt evil,
and they drop them on mostly civilians
 
I'm closing this thread because... well, lets face it, the is-Hitler-evil? bit is the end-point of intelligence discussion, no matter where you go.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top