CreateDebate


Debate Info

67
95
Yes No
Debate Score:162
Arguments:75
Total Votes:244
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (31)
 
 No (44)

Debate Creator

jwitter(141) pic



Would you go back in time and assassinate Hitler?

Is political assassination an option?

Yes

Side Score: 67
VS.

No

Side Score: 95
2 points

From the ideological perspective of preventing genocide, I think that going back in time to assassinate Hitler is absolutely defensible. Whether or not it would work is another question.

Have you ever read about The July 20 Plot?

Side: Yes
pvtNobody(642) Disputed
3 points

While you're reference is accurate, wikipedia is probably not the best source for any information.

Side: No
2 points

Tend to generalize much?

Side: Yes
2 points

I agree Loudacris, if we could go back in time and capture or kill Hitler and prevent him from committing the atrocities that he did, it would be tough to defend a reason not to. However, I think that we all realize that this may be unrealistic; it's not as if the Allies didn't try to capture and/or kill him.

It's very similar to today's conundrum of finding and capturing or killing Osama Bin Laden. We are using every weapon and intelligence capability at our disposal to find him and bring him to justice (such as what happened with Sadaam), but we can't seem to find him. He's guarded by some very smart people who keep him on the move constantly, which is what they did with Hitler.

However, given the assumption that we could find him and assassinate him, I'm not sure how you could convince me it's not a good idea to stop him permanently.

Side: Yes
2 points

Yes, I would go back in time and assassinate him because what he did to all those people was wrong and cruel. I think that someone should kill him the way he did the others. He should die a long painful death.

Side: Yes
Tamisan(890) Disputed
3 points

So you'd go back and kill off everyone who was "wrong and cruel"? But to what degree? For instance, if you went back and killed off all those who killed others, well then you're a killer so you'd have to kill yourself. What about only those who were responsible for mutilation? There goes the Roman Catholic Church. Or maybe just those who believed in genocide? Then you'd have to kill every tribal, kingdom, or political leader who ever existed. Boy, you'll be a busy person.

Side: No
2 points

Agreed. How about we let the people of today learn from mankinds past mistakes.

Side: No
2 points

Now at this point my side on the issue probably is a bit clouded. Let's make something clear, I am in favor of political assassination at times of war. If there is a declared state of war and assassination of a single leader can shorten or prevent further fighting than I absolutely favor assassination. Thus Hitler was a prime target.

However assassination for purely political reasons, for example an uncooperative leader of a foreign nation, is not the place of outsiders. Let sovereign nations take care of their own problems I say.

Side: Yes
2 points

if i could go back i would definitely assassinate hitler. what he did to all those people was wrong. maybe if it wasnt for him there would be no such thing as racism

Side: Yes
2 points

I would go back in time and assasinate Hitler because , if I was succesful in doing the assasination there could of been alot of great diferences in the history that Hitler did during his time

Side: Yes
2 points

Yes, I would go back and blow his freaking brains out. Hitler caused so much pain and suffering for people and killed over 6 million Jews (not to mention the atrocities that were committed to those that survived) during his reign of terror.

If we really could go back and prevent all of this there's no reason we shouldn't. Give me the freaking M-16 and let me have at him.

Side: Yes
1 point

Good point. Take that freaking genocide inducing creep out and save millions of lives. You can't measure that in terms of economic productivity or GDP.

Side: No
2 points

Of course i would go back in time and assasinate him because all he did was cause destruction tp a race that didn't do anything to deserve it. Hitler was a bad person and he meant nothing but harm to the world.

Side: Yes
2 points

I wouldn't call it an 'assassination'. if i had family members being killed because of one mans selfish and rediculous desires, i would join the army in first ranks and get as close to the blasted man as possible...if i had the opportunity you bet i take it.

Side: Yes
2 points

HELL YES the man was a murder and he did it for no reason what so ever he just felt like killing someone and thought he was cool cuz he did kill millions apond millions of people.. to those who say no, go talk to surviver who saw thee mother get raped their shot her and their father or heard there baby sisters screams when they were raping or Beating her then i pretty sure you would change your mind. or at lease i would sternly pray that you do

Side: yes
1 point

Umm, he killed over 6 million people, and if I could go back and stop it, I think I would most definitely kill him so he couldn't do the mass destruction that he caused.

Side: Yes

Yes, I believe that I would because the mass number of people who were brutally dealt with. He was a cruel man, who failed to follow any kind of rule or treaty with anyone who didn't meet his standards. Although, Germany was very weak at the time, partly in fault of allies neglect of support in reconstruction, Hitler reaped what he sowed. One main reason I would like to assassinate him, so I could make sure wherever i shot him, he would ensue a slow painful death, instead of him killing himself in the dawns of capture.

Side: yes

There was an opportunity to assassinate Hitler that wasn't taken. Had Hitler been assassinated, and the States strayed from their ridiculously strict policy of isolationism, WWII may have been avoided and other threats, such as the Japanese and Soviets, may have not had the opportunities or power to build their violent empires.

Side: yes
1 point

Yes i would assassinate Hitler so that not so many innocent people would die for no apparent reason.

Side: yes
1 point

I would go back in time and definitely kill Hitler because he deserves to be killed by someone not from his self. I would kill him before the war even broke out. The SS would probably find me and kill me. I would give my life up to save over 5 million people. It would be worth it to save ww2 hopefully

Side: Yes
0 points

yes I would do this even if it costs my life. I would at least save 11 million people. He killed 6 million jews and 5 million other people. Trust me on this, I took a camp about it. To really know how many 11 million people is do this. 1+1+1+1+1+1+1 11 million tmes million times

Side: Yes
0 points

it is right to assassinate Hitler

Side: Yes
4 points

The best argument against going back in time and assassinating Hitler is that you know how it ended - Germany lost and Hitler blew his brains out. It cost forty, fifty million lives in total but how much may it have cost without Hitler?

Without Hitler, Germany may have remained weakened and unarmed as was intended in the Versailles Treaty. In this environment, and with a policy aim of spreading Communism worldwide, Stalin may have been able to mobilize the Read Army (as Germany mobilized the Whermacht) and sweep aside any opposition in its path (as Germany did in 1939-1942) but the Soviet Union would not have to fight a two-front war against the Soviet Union which chewed up its resources and allowed a knockout punch from the other side. Imagine Red Army troops marching under the Arc d'Triumph rather than German ones as the USSR stretches from the Pacific to the Atlantic. Once the Soviets were in an unassailable position in Europe, the world would be divided in two as colony after colony fell into the Soviet orbit. Imagine just how much blood that would cost.

Stalin managed to kill over thirty million people before WWII even began. As has been said elsewhere, the US armed and mobilized in response to Hitler but maintained those forces to contain the USSR once Germany was defeated.

And that's just Stalin. Who knows who else may have shown up.

Now having been through that experience, we can now recognize (we hope) when it looks as though another Hitler may appear and take steps to contain them.

That said, I would definitely go back and put a bullet in the brain of any effective underling in the service of Hitler once the war had begun (Heydrich comes to mind)

Side: No
1 point

Well said, and well thought out. Interesting perspective. Dont forget to kill Heinrich Himmler as well! And Joseph Goebbels!

Side: No
3 points

I would not go back in time and assassinate Hitler even after all the bad stuff he did. I honestly don't think anyone has the right to kill someone no matter what that person has done. Hitler killed a lot of people and I don't think that the best way to teach him a lesson is to go do the exact same thing he's doing because we wouldn't be teaching him anything.

Side: No
3 points

I don't think live is that black and white.

I do oppose the death penalty, mainly because it is so hard to be sure. But in Hitler's case we know he is directly responsible for millions of deaths and a lot of misery. I'd take that shot.

Actually, with some artistic freedom, I'd probably go back in time and make the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna accept Hitler as a painter ;)

Supporting Evidence: Academy of Fine Arts Vienna (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Yes
SupremeLord(44) Disputed
1 point

I dispute. With thoughts like urs, I am not surprised u dont make it as far as me in life.

Side: No
jwitter(141) Disputed
2 points

I don't think the value of the death penalty, or political assassination, is in teaching the person. Instead, the value comes from stopping them from doing any further harm to others. Also, it would be an example to others who would like to follow in their footsteps.

Side: Yes
3 points

i wouldn't have assassinated Hitler In the past if i was given the chance. The reason is not to prevent the mass killings nor would it be for a an ethical problem. simply because America would not have developed into the power country it is today without World War 2.

Side: No
jwitter(141) Disputed
1 point

You're willing to discount the values of freedom and capitalism as the main contributions to American's success and instead argue that the only reason the US is powerful is because of the deaths of millions?

Side: Yes
pvtNobody(642) Disputed
3 points

Let's look at the facts shall we? When the United States mobilized for war with Germany and Japan (not necessarily in that order) it jump started our economy. More importantly many, many attempts were made and or considered to assassinate Hitler, none of them worked. The man was a genius, evil genius to be sure, but he was a paranoid genius. Let's hear some actual arguments for why someone from the future would be better able to assassinate the man where so many others failed

Side: No
3 points

I don't think assassinating Hitler would be a productive idea. At the time Italy and Japan has aspirations to gain control of large parts of the world as it is. Hitler aided them in their cause but they could still pose a threat without him.

Aside from that, the experiments conducted in concentration camps on the prisoners contributed heavily to modern medicine and science.

Side: No
jwitter(141) Disputed
0 points

Based on your logic, then, would you be willing to establish more concentration camps today, so that science and medicine could be advanced?

Side: No
3 points

Things happen for a reason. Don't fuck with history.

Side: No
2 points

+1

Didn't we learn anything from Time Cop and Back to the Future?

Side: Yes
0 points

Going back in time to kill someone would create a huge paradox that would totally screw up history since then.

Side: Yes
2 points

Hitler was not necessarily the root of the problem. For instance, it can be argued that if Woodrow Wilson had not dragged us into WWI, the conditions that put Hitler into power would never have arisen. We had no business fighting in that war. Germany was not evil. In fact, the royal family of England was German. It was just a spat between the crowned heads of Europe.

OR, we could go back to Darwin, whose theory of evolution was the basis of eugenics, which Hitler used to justify the slaughter of anyone thought to be inferior to the Master Race. Darwin was a virulent racist. The original title of his book was, "The Origin of the Species By the Preservation of Favored Races." Favored races? The second half of that title was mysteriously dropped in the sixth edition.

Darwin's close friend Professor Adam Sedgwick was one of the people who saw what dangers the theory of evolution would give rise to in the future. He remarked, after reading and digesting The Origin of Species, that, "if this book were to find general public acceptance, it would bring with it a brutalization of the human race such as it had never seen before." And, sonofagun, he was right.

Side: No
beevbo(295) Disputed
1 point

The title "Preservation of Favored Races" may sound racist, it's not of course. Races in this context is just a synonym for "species."

Hitler was a Roman Catholic, you know that right? And even if Hitler used evolution as the basis for the Aryan race, is that relevant? I mean, considering all the atrocities committed in the name of God, I think evolution wins in the "which is less evil" category.

Once again, Mr. 35-Year Journalist, you are super wrong.

Supporting Evidence: Adolf Hitler (en.wikipedia.org)
Side: Yes
1 point

He did not drag us into WW1, it was our obligation to join the battle, after Russia resignation due to their civil war, France needed help in which we were entitled to give. Plus it wasn't us who destroyed the cities of Germany which made for a slow reconstruction that they wouldn't be able to finish due to Hitler. And why is evolution brought into this, are you serious, get that out of here.

Side: yes
2 points

I say it is pointless to kill Hitler because although the atrocities that occurred are quiet horrible ie the holocaust. If it wasnt for that, many things in the way of science wouldnt have been invented. Also if hitler was to die, it may cause an even more tyrannical person to rise from the ranks bearing in mind that even though Hitler would be dead, the nazi regime would still have continued. Another reason i would'nt go back in time to kill Hilter is that before he started WW2 he was seen as Germanys freedom, he saved them from the harsh terms of the treaty of varsailles which pretty much left German in a state of termoil, paving the way for men like Hilter to come into power. If the rest of the world had listened to America (haha yes America!!!) WW2 would not have occurred Hitler would'nt have been able to gain the support of the German people and ultimately what happened would have never occurred. Meaning that the argument for going back in time and killing Hilter is pointless because the events that occurred during that period would have happened with or without Hilters help.

Side: No
1 point

You cannot seriously suggest that if Hitler was assasinated that there would have been someone as diabolical as him and follow the same proceedings as he did. And the treaty of Versailles wasnt harsh, it suggested that damges and borders be dealt with and the League of Nations to be established, it was Iltaly who wanted Germany to parish in turmoil. And it's wasnt about "the world" listening to Wilson's 14 points which was about returning to what it used to be with open trade and solutions about over endulged problems. I say as many will that over 6 million Jews wouldnt have died if it wasn't for Hitler, and someone else had become dictator.

Side: yes
1 point

As much as Hitler is seen as the "world's most cruel man" causing the deaths of millions, I must admit that there are two other men that I would like to "assassinate" more than Hitler.

While Hitler did cause about 10 million deaths in his "anti-semitic" programs, we must also look at the characters of Mao and Stalin.

Stalin, under his collectivization programs in 1928, decided to place farms in the USSR under state control. By 1941, all of the farms were controlled (or influenced at the least) by the Soviet Government. With every bit of excess grain taken away from the farmers, farmers had no incentive to produce more grain. As a result? FAMINE. Stalin was too egocentric and wanted to prove that his program worked. Thus, he did not admit to his mistakes. Michael Lynch, a historian, commented on how his denial of the existence of the famine meant that he could not take any "public action against the famine" and could not get foreign aid for the situation. 10-15 million died as a result. Significantly worse than Hitler.

Mao, another character, under his Cult of Personality, decided to launch campaigns against his political enemies and the "bad elements" of China. During the trial of the Gang of Four in 1980, they were accused of a half a million deaths just from the Communist Party in China. As a result of Mao's cultural revolution, the purges in the government, attacks from the Red Guards, the PLA and the like, millions died. Furthermore, when Mao trusted Lysenko from Russia to implement agricultural plans, it failed miserably. As a whole 30-40 million died.

Hmm...for some reason Hitler just doesn't seem as evil any more? Personally, before i assassinate Hitler, I would like to assassinate Mao and Stalin first.

Side: No
1 point

It would be not a very good idea since his hideous wrongdoings serve as a reminder that if you kill this or those people, other people will get back at you somehow.

And certainly he has gone to hell to suffer for what he had done :}

Side: No
1 point

Only an American would ask such a stupid question.

Probably a religious freak at that

The nations of the world made Hitler

If Hitler had not existed, someone else would have been there in his place

Just like the nations of the world made Israel

A Nazi is a Nazi, is a Nazi

Would you kill Ben Gurion or Golda meir ?

Side: No
Thepolitical(4) Disputed
1 point

Sorry but how can you relate hitter to Ben Gurioun? They didn't go putting people in concentration camps. I know that. There would probably be another hitler figure I someone killed him butI would still do it. Golda Meir is not like hitter so I wouldn't kill her! From what I have read you sound very pro nazi I'm I right?

Side: Yes
1 point

Although it was evil,the Holocaust ultimately was the greatest benefactor of democracy.Before you blast me,I'm not saying that it was good.Far from it.Hitler was not the first person to be Anti-Semitic,nor was he the last.However,if Hitler hadn't created the Holocaust,people wouldn't have recognized the dangers of racism.After the Holocaust,perception of the Jews and other races changed.Although it wasn't a deathblow,it was a major wound for racism.Nowadays,racism is condemned by a lot of people.

If you went back in time and killed Hitler(or got him in the arts academy)Germany would've never recovered from the blow of WW1.Stalin could've went over there and crushed it with impunity.

So,although we should recognize that the Holocaust was evil,great good resulted from it.If we went back in time and killed Hitler,racism would still be rampant.

Side: No
0 points

for two reasons

1) things have turned out pretty good, killing Hitler could change time and make things allot worse in the present

2) military research from WW2 created computers

Side: No
0 points

I do not think Hitler merits my sinning by going ahead and killing him. he chose to do wrong. That does not mean I right the wrong by doing another wrong. Moreover, if it was not Hitler, then it could have been Mussolini or for that matter Stalin

Side: No
0 points

I would definitely agree with your statement regarding Mussolini and Stalin. I would further add that in my view, Stalin is by far more brutal than Hitler. Stalin STARVED his own citizens because of his own ego and his inability to accept that his agricultural programs failed. I would totally prefer to assassinate someone like that before Hitler.

Side: Yes
0 points

I'm not sure it would be possible to go back in time, and then remove your purpose for going back in time.

But no I wouldn't, he was such a massive effect that you could never consider all the good that happened as a result of his bad bits.

Side: No
0 points

I would not. While Hitler was evil, we don't know that whoever history had replace him wouldn't have been more evil. Consider the scenario where his 'replacement' is simply more efficient and better at fighting wars, Germany could have conceivably won WWII. Would I want that on my conscience? The only exception would be if I knew the outcome of my choice.

Side: No
0 points

Absolutely not, in spite of Hitler committing the mass killings he did the world would not be in the same place as we see it today. Medical science was advanced almost 100 years because of the atrocities committed during the holocaust.

Side: No
0 points

As BLZBUB said a few comments back, in the grand scheme of things, it was the Capitalist countries that benefitted from World War II (it can be agreed that the war as we know it was due to Hitler). The soviet invasion of Europe could be a possibilty, although the soviet army wasn't mobilised at all when the war began, it did help with the progression of various technologies, namely automotive science, radio communications (britain sold magnetron techonology to the united states for development), computing (the colosus projects) and rocketry. It was believed to be possible to assasinate hitler, but not neccisary due to the fact that in the war Hitler made some very bad decisions and perhaps if it had happened without him the outcome would be different.

Side: No
0 points

I wouldn't cause I would be too afraid of erasing myself from the time-line.

Besides that, we don't know how the world would be now if that had happened. Without Hitler, someone else probably would have done the same thing anyways.

Side: No
0 points

Yes ok Hitler did cause millions of deaths and dis horrible things to people but we also have to remeber that because of those things we have all the stuff that we have today like the jet fuel. And also remember that historians agree that Hitler's second in command was worse than him. Even if you did kill hitler the guy second in command would take his place and it he would probably do worst things than hitler did..........

Side: No
0 points

The Nazi regime was more than just one man. In a way, Hitler was actually responsible for the defeat of Germany. He got so big headed that he ignored his generals and tried to do it his own way (like someone in power today...). If you kill off Hitler as a child, perhaps you could prevent the Nazi uprising, but Hitler only came to power within that party, someone else might have led them to control Germany, and who knows where that would have led. Plus, Fascism was all the rave in Europe then, so another power might have sought out domination.

If you killed off Hitler at the height of Germany's power, then you would actually be helping the Germans stay on their course. Someone with bigger brains and less of an ego might have kept Germany going, would have destroyed the British, wouldn't have invaded Russia, and would have abandoned Japan after they attacked Pearl Harbor so that FDR couldn't declare war on Germany.

To think that killing off one man would help history is naive. How many people did Hitler personally kill? He himself wasn't the thousands of Germans slaughtering the Jews. He, along with a scary bunch of others, instituted the policies that allowed it to happen.

Here's a better idea: GO back in time and campaign to prevent the Nazi party from taking over. Try to get people to vote for their leaders rationally, rather than based on fear.

We can take a lesson from Hitler's rise to power: that people as a whole make stupid decisions when they choose their leaders based on fear, nationalism, and ideology rather than reason and rationalization (oops, too late, we reelected Bush in '04!!).

Side: No
0 points

Ok, Honestly would you kill him? if anything I would help him live longer! If he was still alive then the Earth would be pure! When Hitler was the leader of Germany there was no poverty or hunger or any homeless people! They all had jobs! Germany was against the whole world and they almost won so by that don't you think Hitler was a good leader?! No offense to anyone.

Side: No
0 points

I'd rather see Stalin assassinated, he was responsible for the murder and torture of millions of his own people whereas Hitler only killed 6-8 millions at most, Jewish or not.

Side: No
0 points

Hmmm....I would not assasinate Hitler because besides being imoral, I'm not a murderer.

Side: No
-1 points

Time travel is wrong. Killing is wrong. Besides, Hitler has done a great deal for the humanity, he showed the world the best way he possibly could that no man can use any fact do declare himself as more important \ superior than another. The western side of all of this finally began to acknowledge itself as just ANOTHER option, not the BETTER option.

Side: No
Loudacris(912) Disputed
0 points

Time travel is wrong? Haven't you ever seen Back to the Future?

Side: No
Stav(69) Disputed
1 point

Of course I did.

I still think the motivation behind such an impossible act should be fathomed before the impossible is...tomorrow.

This is my advice for every big change in plans, specifically for time travel, there's this thing about it; time travel is for some kind of a hero, or a psychopath, but just one guy, that got his head around the idea that he knows what would do BETTER to the world [F plus, CLICK], and he will sacrifice other's lives in order to summon his vision world.

In a way, time travel is a very misanthropic idea.

Side: Yes
-1 points

Don't think I would. He's the guy we all love to hate. Besides, I wouldnt want to mess with the whole time paradox thing.

Side: No
-1 points

If we are going to say that countries exist and have sovereignty then we have to be willing to accept when a country decides to elect someone such as Hitler. Hitler was only doing what any other country would have done; take back land they lost. The British Empire use to own so many territories that they eared the saying, The sun never sets on the British Empire.

Side: No
-1 points

no because, i'm not body to judge him. now if i were to defend the jews and i did't had aby family. i would capture him and give it to the jews to do with him whatever they want.

Side: No
-1 points

If I could go back in time. I wouldn't kill or do something bad to Hitler. First because the things he did he might had a reason for them, even if he didn't im not any "perfect" person to judge. He maybe just did what he thought it was right.

Side: No
-1 points

No I wouldn't because people or my self are no one to be making those kind of decisions. We are all human, I know he was terrible man and that what he did make him look like a monster. But who are we to be deciding if he lives or not, only life decides that. All we could had done was justice, but by killing him it hadn't been. Besides by killing him just makes us no better than him.

Side: No
-2 points