3
   

Would you assassinate Hitler?

 
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Dec, 2004 03:46 am
Yes Danni. It would be like Schindlers list but multiplied by a 1000. Imagine how many people would have been saved and then they would have had children and grandchildren etc.
0 Replies
 
danni-lee
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Dec, 2004 03:15 pm
exactly the ramifications would be huge. who knows what kind of effect that would have on now.
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Dec, 2004 06:12 pm
fresco wrote:
Joe,

I assume you want me to give obvious answers like "shortening the war" or "being brave", and I'm wondering where the rhetoric is leading.

Actually, I'm trying to get you to answer at least one question. Let's stick with the one that I asked rather than the one that you wanted me to ask.

You've said that you would probably have been commended for killing Hitler. Presumably, then, your act would have been commended for some reason, and you know why it would be commendable. A professional assassin, for instance, might find your precision or your stealth to be praiseworthy, but then he would be commending your act qua act, without any regard to either motive or consequences. I imagine that's not what you mean when you say that your act would have been commendable, but then I can't be sure: that's why I'm asking.

fresco wrote:
Interestingly, one of the reasons given for the abhorting of an actual assassination attempt by the British Secret Service in 1944 was that it would not have been politically expedient to allow Germany to surrender at that time. Put that one in your "morality pipe" and smoke it !

No, that's not interesting at all. We're not talking about Britain's actual actions, we're talking about your hypothetical ones. Stick to the subject.
0 Replies
 
CarbonSystem
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Dec, 2004 07:56 pm
A genocide against an entire race is far different from civilian casualties which or somewhat of a sideaffect of war, or collateral damage. Has George Bush II herded millions of innocent Iraqi's into concentration camps and left them to be burned alive or left for dead? I think not.
0 Replies
 
Lucifer
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Dec, 2004 09:45 pm
That's a tough choice...

If what I read was correct, then at that time, or a little later, the economy was dropping and the German currency was losing value. Then everyone was starving, unemployed and too poor because everything was too expensive, and if someone didn't do anything, it would have continued to get worse. I don't think people deserve to live in that condition, German or not, and when the people chose Hitler, it changed because he actually did something, instead of just sitting there.

But choosing Hitler comes with a price--even if he got Germany out of that disasterous condition, he made it even worse.

My question is: If Hitler never came into power, would Germany just have continued to rot from increasing financial problems?
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Dec, 2004 11:10 pm
If it had not been Hitler, it would have been someone else. Maybe with not the same vigour, but the Nationalist party already existed and was gaining strength before Hitler came along.

Germany's financial problems existed mainly because of the depression and the huge repatriation payments it was paying(damage payments for the first world war).

There are two main issues when assessing Hitler and most people try to merge them.

1) His ethnic cleansing of the jewes and use of gas chambers and concentration camps. No normal person can condone this or justify it in any shape or form.

2)His Nationalist policy including taking back of land(and taking a lot more that wern't theres), the stopping of repatriation payments, and the invasion of czechoslavakia, poland etc. There are a lot more but would take an eternity to list. I have some empathy with some of his policies however he went too far.
0 Replies
 
Lucifer
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 12:50 am
He did go too far. And in the wrong direction.

I think he was more of a catalyst for the Nationalist party, since they needed his orational skills to do what they had to do. But even then, they started to do what Hitler wanted to do.

Would the Nationalist party have succeeded without Hitler's help?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 01:01 am
australia wrote:
If it had not been Hitler, it would have been someone else.


If you had waited a period - you never can say NOW, if that would have been weeks, months or even years - the political attempts of some of the Weimar governments would have shown good results.
(The concept of the autobahn, e.g., was developed long before Hitler/the Nazis, but everyone seems to connect it with him.)


You can't 'solve' this from nowadays without regarding that all this happened
a) 80 years back,
b) in the very first years of a young democracy,
c) in a huge newly unified country (remember 35 different countries joined together just 40 years before the rise of the Nazis!).
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 02:04 am
I still think there would have been a party like the nazi party, even without hitler. There was a large anti semetic feeling around some parts of europe at that time. Austria had a large amount of people that had the same beliefs as the nationalist party.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 02:07 am
There have been a couple of anti-semitic parties/groups in Germany since late 19th century.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 02:13 am
I read where Klagenfurt has more nazi supporters than any other city in the world.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 02:17 am
Well, Klagebfurt is the capital of the state of Kärnten, which is dominated and ruled by the Austrian liberals - an extreme right wing party, led by Haider.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 02:23 am
It seems Austria is more to the right than Germany.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 02:26 am
Well, similar to Bavaria, I suppose.
0 Replies
 
australia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 13 Dec, 2004 02:28 am
Gruss Gott!!
0 Replies
 
binnyboy
 
  1  
Reply Fri 17 Dec, 2004 01:04 am
So if we were all Native Americans, would we all be arguing about whether we would kill Columbus? Or some other key figure? We sit in the comfort of our raping pillaging nation and cast stones at hitler, when we think very little of the atrocities that were committed to bring us what we have. When I think of this I want to retch Crying or Very sad . The atrocities that were committed in germany at that time are on the level of the atrocities committed in america during the last few centuries. Manifest Destiny Evil or Very Mad Had they won, would the history classes of germany be as casual in their accounts of hitler's gassing as ours are in the treatment of the Native Americans? Man, we really screwed them. The state of texas has recently denied them their casinos and yet still runs a huge state lottery business. We continue to screw them to this day.
0 Replies
 
doyouknowhim
 
  1  
Reply Wed 22 Dec, 2004 07:37 pm
Where is the time machine ? I need to borrow it ?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

How can we be sure? - Discussion by Raishu-tensho
Proof of nonexistence of free will - Discussion by litewave
morals and ethics, how are they different? - Question by existential potential
Destroy My Belief System, Please! - Discussion by Thomas
Star Wars in Philosophy. - Discussion by Logicus
Existence of Everything. - Discussion by Logicus
Is it better to be feared or loved? - Discussion by Black King
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/23/2020 at 05:03:08