Overthrowing oppressive regimes by military force

[Thumpalumpacus]

That's not true. I did ask a history professor and he said "yes, Hitler was the leader of the party and would have held a seat". Again, if you can show me a list of the members of parliament that does not include Hitler I will accept it, otherwise you have no evidence for your disingenuous claim.

An appeal to anonymous authority?

No, that's no source. You will link to a reputable website so that I can view this for myself.

If no one gets elected to the Chancellorship, why did you claim that Hitler was elected?

Oh my god. I said he was elected, I didn't dispute that the chancellorship was appointed. Those are two different things.

Of course they are. You're wrong about the fact that he was elected -- to any office.

Support that contention of yours with a link to one -- just one -- state election with Adolf Hitler listed as winner.

I'mm still waiting for you to support your claim. If you're unable to do so, you should probably take a hint and start investigating the possibility that you're not right. I know that's a big step for you, one you're perhaps not ready for, but trust me -- learning never happens until one admits error.

And you've got a lot of learning to do about this.

[Thumpalumpacus]

As I said, show me that he didn't have a seat at the time he was appointed chancellor? It's very simple all you need is a list of MPs as of January 1933.

Don't know why I have to do your homework before making false claims, but here goes. Look at 1932. The void you should be looking for is under the letter H. If you're so inclined, you can look at the letter H all the way back to the year 1920.

It's filled after the elections of march '33, since Hitler already was chancellor at that time.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_...r_Republik

I'm sure he knows a professor who thinks this is wrong, because the Australians didn't write the list.

[abaris]

I'm sure he knows a professor who thinks this is wrong, because the Australians didn't write the list.

You know, with all this bullshittery going on, I almost forgot to mention the killer argument. Hitler only became a german citizen in february 1932, granted by the Free State of Braunschweig, where one of his buddies ruled. So he couldn't even run for office if he had wanted to. He only got the citizenship because of the presidential elections coming up. The one and only elections where he personally participated.

Before that he was stateless because he himself had renounced his austrian citizenship in the early 20ies.

[Thumpalumpacus]

There's that, too. I had plumb forgotten about it, but a decisive point.

[The Grand Nudger]

I said that the B29 was ready to go when the war started.  It was.  Move on.

Except that it wasn't..and now you've repeated a lie that was exposed before you chose to -triple- down. It wasn't even a clever lie....that's what's so disappointing, to me.  

It would have been nice if it was ready, brass obviously wanted it to be...maybe the war could have been over sooner. They excelled at low level incendiery bombings...and that breaks backs, quick. Nothing like burning to death to sap the will to fight.

[Minimalist]

They still did not stage a coup like Mussolini and Franco did.

Oh. come on. Look up the "coup" Mussolini staged. It was just a demonstration and not a very good one. If the Italian king had been opposed to appointing that little stage actor, the military could have taken care of it within two hours tops. Mussolini prefered taking the train anyway. First class if I'm not mistaken.

If if's and buts were candy and nuts we'd all have a merry christmas.

I used to work with a guy who said that all the time.  He was a little strange.

[Aractus]

Don't know why I have to do your homework before making false claims, but here goes. Look at 1932. The void you should be looking for is under the letter H. If you're so inclined, you can look at the letter H all the way back to the year 1920.

It's filled after the elections of march '33, since Hitler already was chancellor at that time.

https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_...r_Republik

Okay I'll accept that list. Hitler personally was not elected, but how does that change the fact that the NAZIs were elected to govern? And they formed a coalition with a majority from the December 1932 election result?

Germany in 1932 was more of a democracy than the USA is today. They had greater voter representation. The problem was that that the President had too much power. As you know he is the one who elected the Chancellor, and he could give the Chancellor the emergency powers to "rule by decree" which is pretty much what all the Chancellors leading up to Hitler were doing because the parliament was too divided.

What really screwed Germany was the in 1934 the President died and Hitler assumed his responsibilities. That was illegal, but no one stopped him.

So let's backtrack. None of this has anything to do with Hitler personally. Yes he was the leader of the NAZI party, and yes he was the one who wanted the direction the party went in in the later 1920s that ultimately lead to them gaining power, but even without him those events probably would have happened anyway. That's my point here. It doesn't matter if Cruz, Trump or Rubio gets into the White House the net effect will be the same: the poor in America will be royally screwed. Yes some of the individual polices are different, but the net effect is the same: very bad news if you're not at least upper-middle class. Hitler did the exact opposite. As soon as the Hitler got into power they made life much better for the poor, something the previous Chancellors had completely failed to do. So Hitler's policies were in fact good for Germany - bad for other countries, very bad for minority groups, but good for the domestic Aryans. Sound familiar?

[Thumpalumpacus]

Okay I'll accept that list. Hitler personally was not elected, but how does that change the fact that the NAZIs were elected to govern?

The NaZis weren't elected to govern. They had to form a coalition to do so ... as you yourself pointed out earlier in this thread. Watching you pretzel yourself in order to avoid admitting error is almost embarrassing, as a reader.

lol @ your backpedaling. May you learn more and post less.

[Minimalist]

I suspect the major point of the whole discussion is that if you are going to overthrow an "oppressive" regime you should have a plan to replace it with something better.

Seems to me that is the point where the US always goes down the shitter.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I suspect the major point of the whole discussion is that if you are going to overthrow an "oppressive" regime you should have a plan to replace it with something better.

Seems to me that is the point where the US always goes down the shitter.

No, the OP's point was that if America suffered what America inflicted, Americans might think differently. It's not a bad point. It's just that he supports it with pop-culture "facts" rather than actually informing himself.