Posts: 1011
Threads: 57
Joined: December 22, 2009
Reputation:
6
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 12:02 am
(This post was last modified: October 17, 2010 at 1:21 am by ib.me.ub.)
(October 16, 2010 at 11:48 pm)Minimalist Wrote: Oh, Hitler had a reason. You may not think it was a very good reason but then, you weren't on the losing side of the First World War.
A reason based on racism & biggotry. So, your justification relies on the merits of revenge. You think they would have learnt their lesson the first time around the block.
Quote:Britain and France reacted when Hitler invaded Poland. They sat on their hands through Hitler's earlier moves. Perhaps Hitler merely miscalculated their resolve?
Perhaps he merely did. Oh, perhaps merely is the wrong word too use, as it resulted in the complete annihilation of the Third Reich.
Quote:Besides, The British and French (and later the US) made an alliance with Stalin who was an even bigger prick than Hitler.
But they didn't invade a sovereign country. This is beside the point of the original question anyway. You have gone way off tangent to support your own assertions. The questions was;
Quote:But then again, what would have happened if, early on, he had been assassinated, and somebody actually competent managed to take over?
I answered the question how I see fit. Please fucking answer it yourself if you like.
(October 16, 2010 at 11:51 pm)ChromodynamicGirl Wrote: I can make it real simple. Kill 'em all.
You should start with yourself.
Posts: 48
Threads: 1
Joined: October 16, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 12:05 am
(October 17, 2010 at 12:00 am)Minimalist Wrote: You sure you're not religious?
That sounds like the holier-than-thou crowd. Your confusing superiority with misanthropy. Though, as it happens, I am also superior.
"Philosophy would do well to desist from issuing any further injunctions about the need to re-establish the meaningfulness of existence, the purposefulness of life, or mend the shattered concord between man and nature. It should strive to be more than a sop to the pathetic twinge of human self-esteem. Nihilism is not an existential quandary but a speculative opportunity." - Ray Brassier
My Blog, Nazis are Sexy
Posts: 1011
Threads: 57
Joined: December 22, 2009
Reputation:
6
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 12:14 am
A superior nazi racist waste of oxygen.
Posts: 48
Threads: 1
Joined: October 16, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 12:58 am
(This post was last modified: October 17, 2010 at 1:07 am by ChromodynamicGirl.)
Quote:This is one of the largest problems with Atheism. Atheists can be 'good' people. But everything is permissible...
This isn't a problem with atheists, it's a problem with retards who believe in morality. What's more, your magical sky daddy existing wouldn't somehow make morality true; it would just mean there is a vindictive superman who will punish you if you do something he doesn't like.
"I don't like the consequences this theory entails, ergo the theory must be wrong." Too bad the Universe doesn't exist to make you feel important.
God, you people make such inane arguments.
"Philosophy would do well to desist from issuing any further injunctions about the need to re-establish the meaningfulness of existence, the purposefulness of life, or mend the shattered concord between man and nature. It should strive to be more than a sop to the pathetic twinge of human self-esteem. Nihilism is not an existential quandary but a speculative opportunity." - Ray Brassier
My Blog, Nazis are Sexy
Posts: 69247
Threads: 3759
Joined: August 2, 2009
Reputation:
259
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 1:09 am
(This post was last modified: October 17, 2010 at 1:10 am by Minimalist.)
Quote:A reason based on racism & biggotry. So, your justification relies on the merits of revenge. You think they would have learnt their lesson the first time around the block.
Actually, the issue which propelled Hitler into the limelight was the perception in Germany that they had been screwed at Versailles. Yeah - he put all his racist claptrap into Mein Kampf. Apparently either no one cared or anti-semitism was real popular in xtian Germany. I sort of think the latter.
Quote:Perhaps he merely did. Oh, perhaps merely is the wrong word too use, as it resulted in the complete anialation of the Third Reich.
Lots of rulers throughout history have made that mistake. Tougher on the followers than the ruler.
Quote:But they didn't invade a sovereign country.
Tell that to the Dutch.
Quote:"My country can never again afford the luxury of another Montgomery success."
--Prince Bernhard of Holland
Quote:This is beside the point of the original question anyway. You have gone way off tangent to support your own assertions.
There was a point to the original question?
Posts: 1011
Threads: 57
Joined: December 22, 2009
Reputation:
6
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 1:43 am
ibmeub Wrote:But they didn't invade a sovereign country.
Minimalist Wrote:Tell that to the Dutch. +
Quote:"My country can never again afford the luxury of another Montgomery success."
--Prince Bernhard of Holland
You are refering to operation Market Garden, this has little to do with the initial post. The Netherlands was occupied by the Germans at the time of Operation Market Garden.
ibgub Wrote:This is beside the point of the original question anyway. You have gone way off tangent to support your own assertions.
Minimalist Wrote:There was a point to the original question?
initial question Wrote:But then again, what would have happened if, early on, he had been assassinated, and somebody actually competent managed to take over?
Clearly there is a point Minimalist. Apparently, the author would like you to deduce what you think would have happened if Hitler was assasinated!
It only need be a simple answer ;-)
Posts: 12806
Threads: 158
Joined: February 13, 2010
Reputation:
111
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 1:49 am
Quote:God, you people make such inane arguments.
They go along well with blanket statements.
Posts: 48
Threads: 1
Joined: October 16, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 2:28 am
(October 17, 2010 at 1:49 am)Shell B Wrote: They go along well with blanket statements. Unlike the pseudoarguments of you pseudointellectuals, these blanket statements have the property of being correct and meaningful.
"Philosophy would do well to desist from issuing any further injunctions about the need to re-establish the meaningfulness of existence, the purposefulness of life, or mend the shattered concord between man and nature. It should strive to be more than a sop to the pathetic twinge of human self-esteem. Nihilism is not an existential quandary but a speculative opportunity." - Ray Brassier
My Blog, Nazis are Sexy
Posts: 7388
Threads: 168
Joined: February 25, 2009
Reputation:
45
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 2:37 am
(This post was last modified: October 17, 2010 at 2:37 am by Oldandeasilyconfused.)
Quote:Though, as it happens, I am also superior.
Of course you are dear,and don't you let anyone tell you anything different.
Posts: 48
Threads: 1
Joined: October 16, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: Was Hitler objectively bad?
October 17, 2010 at 2:47 am
(October 17, 2010 at 2:37 am)padraic Wrote: Of course you are dear,and don't you let anyone tell you anything different.
Never do.
"Philosophy would do well to desist from issuing any further injunctions about the need to re-establish the meaningfulness of existence, the purposefulness of life, or mend the shattered concord between man and nature. It should strive to be more than a sop to the pathetic twinge of human self-esteem. Nihilism is not an existential quandary but a speculative opportunity." - Ray Brassier
My Blog, Nazis are Sexy
|