Mikeegrini
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 28 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 3,745
- Team supported
- City win UEFA lose, oh City....
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
In comparison to whom or what?
In comparison to whom or what?
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
hitler.
- Thread starter Fame Monster
- Start date
CITY FOR LIFE
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
MODs need to withdraw before it gets out of hand. Stupid OP going nowhere and will end in tears.
MODs need to withdraw before it gets out of hand. Stupid OP going nowhere and will end in tears.
Obvious Mancunian
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
is your next thread ---------- is Cancer really that bad?
hitler, was not a human being, i wont carry on because we will be here for ever. don't ask stupid questions. yes he had fantastic leadership qualities, unfortunatley he used them to catastrophic effect. words cannot describe how much of a **** he was.
is your next thread ---------- is Cancer really that bad?
hitler, was not a human being, i wont carry on because we will be here for ever. don't ask stupid questions. yes he had fantastic leadership qualities, unfortunatley he used them to catastrophic effect. words cannot describe how much of a **** he was.
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
Fair enough, I apologise for my impartiality as OP.
Hitler was terrible, at least a 9 on my scale of horrific world leaders. I am raising the question as it appears in historical texts that he was the only one who shouldered the blame. He was also the face of the German people, not an individual who took them into war on his own accord. The German people wanted to reclaim their former territories and were quite happy, it seems, till circa 1941. He also encouraged trading with the east and brought the German economy back to a stable condition until 1940. It was the German people who wanted to reinvent colonialism, and Hitler was in charge of that. British people forget that under Gladstone and Disraeli, we were very similar.
Sorry City for life if you are offended by a simple question. BTW, I do know a lot more about history than you.
It would be the ultimate irony if this thread gets pulled.
CTID 1988, very funny.
Fair enough, I apologise for my impartiality as OP.
Hitler was terrible, at least a 9 on my scale of horrific world leaders. I am raising the question as it appears in historical texts that he was the only one who shouldered the blame. He was also the face of the German people, not an individual who took them into war on his own accord. The German people wanted to reclaim their former territories and were quite happy, it seems, till circa 1941. He also encouraged trading with the east and brought the German economy back to a stable condition until 1940. It was the German people who wanted to reinvent colonialism, and Hitler was in charge of that. British people forget that under Gladstone and Disraeli, we were very similar.
Sorry City for life if you are offended by a simple question. BTW, I do know a lot more about history than you.
It would be the ultimate irony if this thread gets pulled.
CTID 1988, very funny.
feedthegoat
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 20 Jan 2006
- Messages
- 860
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
Did a bit of travelling Sudetenland, Poland and France before settling back in Berlin getting married and living happily never after.CTID1988 said:Ive got a huge anthology of books on his life. He seems like a really nice guy to me. Im missing Volume III: 1939 - 1945, if anybody has it can they let me know
shadygiz
Moderator
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
the german people were indoctrinated into believing they had a right to claim land...land that the nazi party said was part of the fatherland....the nazi party doctered the situation for their own benefit and forced their propoganda on the people
the german people were indoctrinated into believing they had a right to claim land...land that the nazi party said was part of the fatherland....the nazi party doctered the situation for their own benefit and forced their propoganda on the people
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
Indoctrination is not the same as coercion.
shadygiz said:the german people were indoctrinated into believing they had a right to claim land...land that the nazi party said was part of the fatherland....the nazi party doctered the situation for their own benefit and forced their propoganda on the people
Indoctrination is not the same as coercion.
CITY FOR LIFE
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
nashark said:Fair enough, I apologise for my impartiality as OP.
Hitler was terrible, at least a 9 on my scale of horrific world leaders. I am raising the question as it appears in historical texts that he was the only one who shouldered the blame. He was also the face of the German people, not an individual who took them into war on his own accord. The German people wanted to reclaim their former territories and were quite happy, it seems, till circa 1941. He also encouraged trading with the east and brought the German economy back to a stable condition until 1940. It was the German people who wanted to reinvent colonialism, and Hitler was in charge of that. British people forget that under Gladstone and Disraeli, we were very similar.
Sorry City for life if you are offended by a simple question. BTW, I do know a lot more about history than you.
If you do know more about history then me, I am pleased for you, seeing I have completed 33 years miltary service and still serving, and in that time spent 6 years in Germany with the Forces I may know a little more about History then you think. In that time I spent 2 years living with a German family and spent many a hour talking with older members of the family about past events and the effect it had on them as Human beings but more importantly as Germans. So I was not offended by your OP but very suprised that this kind of question would be asked.
Having served in the Falklands,Germany, Malta, 2 Gulf Wars, Iraq and Afgan I would like to think I have taken the time to learn a little about History or maybe I wouldn't put my own life on the line.
It would be the ultimate irony if this thread gets pulled.
CTID 1988, very funny.
shadygiz
Moderator
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
thats the way you see it, but not for me...the nazi party spent over 10 years building towards war, in all that time they built up hitler youths and indoctrinated children into believing they were a superior race....thats not coercion
nashark said:shadygiz said:the german people were indoctrinated into believing they had a right to claim land...land that the nazi party said was part of the fatherland....the nazi party doctered the situation for their own benefit and forced their propoganda on the people
Indoctrination is not the same as coercion.
thats the way you see it, but not for me...the nazi party spent over 10 years building towards war, in all that time they built up hitler youths and indoctrinated children into believing they were a superior race....thats not coercion
Helmet Cole
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 8,054
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
Hitler was a product of his time and the prevailing national sentiment. He came to power on the back of national anger fear, and insecurity. Much the same as the smaller scale rise of the BNP that we are seeing now with their bollocks. (no offence intended to BNP members)
Hitler was a product of his time and the prevailing national sentiment. He came to power on the back of national anger fear, and insecurity. Much the same as the smaller scale rise of the BNP that we are seeing now with their bollocks. (no offence intended to BNP members)
Challenger1978
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
Lmao i don't know does the Pope shit in the woods ????????????.
foxy said:Does the pope shit in the woods?
Lmao i don't know does the Pope shit in the woods ????????????.
Helmet Cole
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 23 Jul 2007
- Messages
- 8,054
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
oops double post
oops double post
roaminblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 2,991
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
this, exactly this!
it was Hitler's rhetoric and propoganda that manipulated germany. He wasn't acting on behalf of the german population, he was manipulating the populace into thinking in the same way that he was.
It shouldn't come as any suprise that in the aftermath of the war (when the local population around concentration camps were tasked to clear up the mess) that, on the most part, the civilians were very shocked at what was actually going on in side.
shadygiz said:the german people were indoctrinated into believing they had a right to claim land...land that the nazi party said was part of the fatherland....the nazi party doctered the situation for their own benefit and forced their propoganda on the people
this, exactly this!
it was Hitler's rhetoric and propoganda that manipulated germany. He wasn't acting on behalf of the german population, he was manipulating the populace into thinking in the same way that he was.
It shouldn't come as any suprise that in the aftermath of the war (when the local population around concentration camps were tasked to clear up the mess) that, on the most part, the civilians were very shocked at what was actually going on in side.
Barcon
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
I'll tell you what arsehole, why don't you go down to Phillips park cemy and dig up my Grandads and ask them if Hitler was that bad. Or, for that matter, seeing as how it's just a question anyway, why don't you go down to the local boozer and ask some of the people in there? Fucking dick head.
I'll tell you what arsehole, why don't you go down to Phillips park cemy and dig up my Grandads and ask them if Hitler was that bad. Or, for that matter, seeing as how it's just a question anyway, why don't you go down to the local boozer and ask some of the people in there? Fucking dick head.
DirtyEddie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 1,188
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
i mean at nuremberg alone the the nazis tried were charged with crimes against the peace, being involved in waging a war of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity. and whatever faults that trial or any subsequent trial had to claim that hitler was 'the only one who shouldered the blame' is quite clearly a load of rubbish.
blame for what? what about the nuremberg trials? or any of the other trials of former nazis that have taken place over the last 60 years?nashark said:he was the only one who shouldered the blame.
i mean at nuremberg alone the the nazis tried were charged with crimes against the peace, being involved in waging a war of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity. and whatever faults that trial or any subsequent trial had to claim that hitler was 'the only one who shouldered the blame' is quite clearly a load of rubbish.
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
That's the sort of insight I was hoping for when I started the thread. Shadygiz provided that as well. I'd like to emphasise I am not arguing for or against anything but I find it strange that there is a distinct demarcation(pleonasm of sorts) between the German people and Hitler. Was Hitler not the voice of the German people until it got out of hand?
Helmet Cole said:Hitler was a product of his time and the prevailing national sentiment. He came to power on the back of national anger fear, and insecurity. Much the same as the smaller scale rise of the BNP that we are seeing now with their bollocks. (no offence intended to BNP members)
That's the sort of insight I was hoping for when I started the thread. Shadygiz provided that as well. I'd like to emphasise I am not arguing for or against anything but I find it strange that there is a distinct demarcation(pleonasm of sorts) between the German people and Hitler. Was Hitler not the voice of the German people until it got out of hand?
roaminblue
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 27 Apr 2008
- Messages
- 2,991
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
It isn't and this wasn't coercion.
It was years and years of black propoganda, and media ops. It was indoncrination in every sense. children grew up learning maths which, apart from the basic arithmatic, also instilled a fear and hatred of Jewish people, or the mentally ill, or the handicapped.
This is an actuall textbook question:
To keep a mentally ill person costs approx. 4 RM per day, a cripple 5.50 RM, a criminal 3.50 RM. Many civil servants receive only 4 RM per day, white collar employees barely 3.50 RM, unskilled workers not even 2 RM per head for their families. (a) Illustrate these figures with a diagram. According to conservative estimates there are 300,000 mentally ill, epileptics, etc. in care. (b) How much do these people cost to keep in total, at a cost of 4 RM per head? (c) How many marriage loans at 1000 RM each … could be granted from this money?*
check out this website:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/m/mills-mary/mills-00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/m/mil ... ls-00.html</a>
Hitler and his govermnent were completely changing and developing the mindset to be in line with their own ideology and it infiltrated everything.
He was developing a group of people that would share his beliefs, and keep on sharing his beliefs until the end of time
nashark said:Indoctrination is not the same as coercion.
It isn't and this wasn't coercion.
It was years and years of black propoganda, and media ops. It was indoncrination in every sense. children grew up learning maths which, apart from the basic arithmatic, also instilled a fear and hatred of Jewish people, or the mentally ill, or the handicapped.
This is an actuall textbook question:
To keep a mentally ill person costs approx. 4 RM per day, a cripple 5.50 RM, a criminal 3.50 RM. Many civil servants receive only 4 RM per day, white collar employees barely 3.50 RM, unskilled workers not even 2 RM per head for their families. (a) Illustrate these figures with a diagram. According to conservative estimates there are 300,000 mentally ill, epileptics, etc. in care. (b) How much do these people cost to keep in total, at a cost of 4 RM per head? (c) How many marriage loans at 1000 RM each … could be granted from this money?*
check out this website:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/m/mills-mary/mills-00.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/m/mil ... ls-00.html</a>
Hitler and his govermnent were completely changing and developing the mindset to be in line with their own ideology and it infiltrated everything.
He was developing a group of people that would share his beliefs, and keep on sharing his beliefs until the end of time
Fame Monster
Well-Known Member
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
What about the many Nazi's who were acquitted as they were doing as they were told? I understand your point but over the last 60 years, it has been removed from Germany as a nation.
DirtyEddie said:blame for what? what about the nuremberg trials? or any of the other trials of former nazis that have taken place over the last 60 years?nashark said:he was the only one who shouldered the blame.
i mean at nuremberg alone the the nazis tried were charged with crimes against the peace, being involved in waging a war of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity. and whatever faults that trial or any subsequent trial had to claim that hitler was 'the only one who shouldered the blame' is quite clearly a load of rubbish.
What about the many Nazi's who were acquitted as they were doing as they were told? I understand your point but over the last 60 years, it has been removed from Germany as a nation.
DirtyEddie
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 2 Jan 2008
- Messages
- 1,188
Re: Was Hitler that bad?
which nazis specifically are you refering to who were acquitted for just 'doing as they were told'? and you will have to rephrase the second thing you said because ive read it twice and still have no idea what you meannashark said:DirtyEddie said:blame for what? what about the nuremberg trials? or any of the other trials of former nazis that have taken place over the last 60 years?
i mean at nuremberg alone the the nazis tried were charged with crimes against the peace, being involved in waging a war of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity. and whatever faults that trial or any subsequent trial had to claim that hitler was 'the only one who shouldered the blame' is quite clearly a load of rubbish.
What about the many Nazi's who were acquitted as they were doing as they were told? I understand your point but over the last 60 years, it has been removed from Germany as a nation.