Was Hitler...EVIL?

Originally posted by Rapscallion
fair enough. i already explained why i think he is evil earlier on page 11 (don't feel like typing it all back up) but simply put: He is responsible for more murders than anyone else in history and he did it with the intent to hurt people not help. i think murdering is undeniably bad, and he murdered a ton of people.

new question: you say evil could exhist. if it does exhist, hypothetically do you think it could exhist in anyone if it didn't exhist in hitler?

Well, then let me rephrase, what do you base your opinion on that murder is actually evil? That harming people is evil?

To answer your question, in case there does some sort of evil exist, I find it just as possible that Hitler was still not evil while others were. I have no clue how some absolute sort of moral code could look like, but why shouldn't killing Jews, homosexuals, etc. be one of the best good deeds a human can do? Could be.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
nope, not from my arse....he was just an evil mutha. if you kill millions, something is not right upstairs.

Why? Any proof of that? Where does it absolutely and undeniably say that Hitler was evil? Since I am very able to deny it...weirdly enough.

Originally posted by debbiejo
Are you sure??

Debbie, think before you post...and then just don't do it. The part you posted isn't even a full statement. Think, debbie. THINK.

Originally posted by Robtard
Correct, there is no absolute way to prove the Evil or Good exist in scientific terms. But the vast majority of sane, logical and rational people would agree that senselessly killing millions of people for superficial reasons is 'evil' while say willingly sacrificing yourself so someone else can live would be 'good'. So in that sense, Hitler was evil.

In a subjective sense for many people. Sure, does that mean he was actually evil? No.

Originally posted by who?-kid
I'm curious if you still would say exactly the same thing if you had spent a few years in a concentration camp, after your mother and father have been brutally murdered and your sister has been raped and killed.

Originally posted by ~Flamboyant~
I'm certain he would.

That's nice Flamboyant, but I am not sure if I would. It might change my opinion, since it is just the kind of thing that changes people' opinions and psychological structure. I like to think I would still think the same, but even if I wouldn't, it doesn't mean I am wrong now....because I happen to be right.

If something would change your opinion to "the earth is flat as a pancake" ...would you be right, just because that something happened? Or were you right before, when you said the earth is a sphere?

Originally posted by Robtard
Correction, there are far worst murderers in history body count wise.

total body count: about 62 million, 37 million of which were civilians and about 7 million were in the axis powers. is there anyone else in history directly responsible for more than 62 million deaths?

oh and yeah i believe harming others is bad, the motivation behind the harming and the amount of harm it inflicts determines whether it is evil.

Originally posted by Rapscallion
total body count: about 62 million, 37 million of which were civilians and about 7 million were in the axis powers. is there anyone else in history directly responsible for more than 62 million deaths?

oh and yeah i believe harming others is bad, the motivation behind the harming and the amount of harm it inflicts determines whether it is evil.

What deaths do you count in the 62 million?

Here are real numbers of the genocides of the 20th century

Wikipedia says the total deaths between the armed conflict and the camps is somewhere around 62,536,700. I've always thought it was funny how people argue about who is the biggest badass historical dictator. Like theirs is the best and better murderer, because they like them the most.

Originally posted by Bardock42
What deaths do you count in the 62 million?

Here are real numbers of the genocides of the 20th century

i should count all of them because he is directly responsible for all of them. However, of the 62, i guess i could only count the allies even though he pretty much sent his own country men to death insisting they keep fighting well after they had lost the war. so i guess about 54-55 million.

and as for mao ze-dong, the great leap forward was an economic plan that failed miserably resulting in a famine that killed about 25 million which was included in the total number of deaths under his rule even though it wasn't genocide.

Originally posted by Rapscallion
i should count all of them because he is directly responsible for all of them. However, of the 62, i guess i could only count the allies even though he pretty much sent his own country men to death insisting they keep fighting well after they had lost the war. so i guess about 54-55 million.

and as for mao ze-dong, the great leap forward was an economic plan that failed miserably resulting in a famine that killed about 25 million which was included in the total number of deaths under his rule even though it wasn't genocide.

So you count every death in the second world war for Hitler? That's weird, people usually don't do that.

Originally posted by Bardock42
So you count every death in the second world war for Hitler? That'S weird, people usually don't do that.

probably because its completely incorrect to do so.

Originally posted by PVS
probably because its completely incorrect to do so.

Probably.

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's nice Flamboyant, but I am not sure if I would. It might change my opinion, since it is just the kind of thing that changes people' opinions and psychological structure. I like to think I would still think the same, but even if I wouldn't, it doesn't mean I am wrong now....because I happen to be right.

If something would change your opinion to "the earth is flat as a pancake" ...would you be right, just because that something happened? Or were you right before, when you said the earth is a sphere?

Originally posted by who?-kid
At least you have the honesty to admit there is a chance you would change your mind. I respect that.
[B]
That's comparing apples and oranges.

Okay, may I now also ask what it has to do with the topic? I mean...at all?

No it's not it is a very similar example to what you were saying. Changing your mind does not mean that your changed opinion is more right than the initial one.

Originally posted by Bardock42
So you count every death in the second world war for Hitler? That's weird, people usually don't do that.

oh so 50 milion people would have just dropped dead if he hadn't invaded poland? i said he was directly responsible for 62 million deaths, and he is. none would have died if he hadn't invaded poland, but he did and so they all died. it's not like i'm counting kills for hitler like this some game. it doesn't matter if he literally pulled the trigger or made the order. millions died, and it is entirely because of his actions. how may do you think i should count. only the people he himself killed, only those in concentration camps, only those he ordered his soldiers to kill, only his own soldiers he was responsible for, only those killed by the axis powers, only those who he provoked into war?

Originally posted by Rapscallion
oh so 50 milion people would have just dropped dead if he hadn't invaded poland? i said he was directly responsible for 62 million deaths, and he is. none would have died if he hadn't invaded poland, but he did and so they all died. it's not like i'm counting kills for hitler like this some game. it doesn't matter if he literally pulled the trigger or made the order. millions died, and it is entirely because of his actions. how may do you think i should count. only the people he himself killed, only those in concentration camps, only those he ordered his soldiers to kill, only his own soldiers he was responsible for, only those killed by the axis powers, only those who he provoked into war?

Nah, that's stupid reasoning...it also leaves out all of the Pacific fights. If Stalin had fought differently less would have died. If the US would have entered sooner less would have died. You just don't count deaths of war on the responsible list of one person. You don't do it.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Nah, that's stupid reasoning...it also leaves out all of the Pacific fights. If Stalin had fought differently less would have died. If the US would have entered sooner less would have died. You just don't count deaths of war on the responsible list of one person. You don't do it.

obviously a lot of things and people led to what ww II ended up being. but you cannot possibly believe any one is more responsible for thesed deaths than hitler. yeah, if stalin fought differently less would have died, but he wouldn't have been fighting anyone if hitler hadn't started a war. yeah the u.s. could have saved lives by entering sooner, but if it wasn't for hitler there would not have been a war to enter. plus if hitler had had his way, millions more would have died, so in both your examples, they actually ended up saving lives. imagine how many more if the soviet union and u.s. didn't get involved. those deaths are not the fault of the allies. they are on hitler. and you still didn't answer the question. how many is he responsible for then?

Originally posted by Robtard
Your grandmother is a Nazi? LOL, that's has to suck.

and no the Christmas gifts where ever THAT good, we got lighters and coal from them.

Originally posted by WickedTexasMomA
Yes it was a little weird growing up next door to her and grandpa. Between the two I am not sure who hit me harder with the broom. 😕 They are just..I am not sure there is a word for that pair to be honest. Grams even served in the Nazi army back in the day and from what I hear grams was a nurse..they deserve to be miserable together.lol

and no the Christmas gifts where ever THAT good, we got lighters and coal from them.

Through profound research, I discovered a picture of your Grandmothers Nazi military days of old...

Oh god Gram's Breast..*Faints*..These days they hang down to her waist.

Originally posted by WickedTexasMomA
Oh god Gram's Breast..*Faints*..These days they hang down to her waist.

I've only seen small clips of the film, but it looks like your grammy had a penchant for nipple torture and anal play. Think about that the next time she asks you for a kiss...

Originally posted by Bardock42
You just don't count deaths of war on the responsible list of one person. You don't do it.

Blaming Hitler for every single death of war is of course a mistake. But he's responsible for the majority of deaths however. Hitler (together with the German people who elected him) is responsible, easy as pie.

Everything else is speculation...

Originally posted by Robtard
I've only seen small clips of the film, but it looks like your grammy had a penchant for nipple torture and anal play. Think about that the next time she asked you for a kiss...

Originally posted by who?-kid
Why not ?

Blaming Hitler for every single death of war is of course a mistake. But he's responsible for the majority of deaths however. Hitler (together with the German people who elected him) is responsible, easy as pie.

Everything else is speculation...