was hitler really that bad?
yes
Side Score: 7
|
 |
no
Side Score: 45
|
|
|
|
|
I personally believe that he was NOT a good man, The things thats those in the concentration camps had to live through was horrific and he allowed it to happen. He might have had some good qualties (Feel free to beg to differ because they were probably hidden deep, deep within him) But all around he was actually 'that bad' he was a monster and he deserved whatever actually did happen to him in the end (Which I'm still clueless about) Side: yes
Well, murdering millions of innocent people just because they looked different sure as hell strikes me as pretty fuckin' bad. Sure, compared to Stalin or Mao Hitler was a cupcake, but compared to EVERY OTHER LIVING HUMAN BEING ON THE PLANET the guy was the asshole licking, cock mongling, shit eater of the year. Side: yes
1
point
5
points
5
points
5
points
5
points
5
points
5
points
5
points
5
points
1
point
1
point
Your "America threw two nukes" argument is not only flat-out wrong but also you fail to consider the cause for the nukes. First you must consider America's reason for going to war vs hitler's reason for going to war. Hitler was rascist, which is immoral. Hitler seeked totaltarianism, which put morality aside for personal greed. Consider what would happen if hitler and the United States were each gave a "perfect weapon". This weapon could kill any person when targeted. The United States would have first offered the opposing armies to surrender, and if they did not the United States would use this weapon to kill all members of the opposing army. When the United States dropped the nukes, they did so because it was necessary to end the war, as japan's military code stated that they would not stop participating in a war. The United States did not want to kill innocent citizens. Meanwhile, if Hitler was armed with the perfect weapon he would have used it to kill virtually everyone in the world except specific sects of the christian faith, innocent citizens also who were completely hopeless. Was hitler really that bad? yes. Side: Absolutely
|
1
point
Clearly Hitler committed many atrocities. To deny that would be futile and in my opinion morally wrong. In mitigation, as we analyse his motivation for military action, it is important to remember the sanctions placed upon Germany after WW1. Their borders were reduced, armies limited to a point whereby defence was no longer strong enough and the country was becoming sunken into a depression- not helped by the global economical crisis. Hitler (apparently) felt that the settlement was unfair and was unhappy with the state of the country. He offered people hope and united much of a disharmonious country. He instilled belief in people and these qualities are very positive. It's a shame that his beliefs weren't different- with his skills in dealing with people, he could've had a lasting positive impact. Perhaps if he'd felt fairness had been shown in the first place, his burning anger would never had started. I include my argument in this side to highlight the mitigating factors. The question asks 'that bad'- relative to the beliefs in the UK- in my opinion probably not... Side: yes
0
points
-2
points
|
