• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is assasination ever called for

Is assasination ever the right thing to do

  • In some cases assasination is right

    Votes: 30 83.3%
  • assasination is never right EVER

    Votes: 6 16.7%

  • Total voters
    36
Cardinal said:
Something I'm not entirely clear on myself is, how responsible is Hitler personally for the events that led to WWII and the Holocaust? Did he simply ride a tidal wave of historical events? Or did he shape the thoughts of the time so specifically that those events never would have happened had he not lived?

I've wondered the same myself. My step-father was a German Jew whose parents got out of Germany just three months before the borders were closed. I call him my step-father, but really, he was my father, in that he was the one who taught me how to be a man. Anyway, looking at his family tree is depressing, as pretty much everyone else in his family ended up at Bergen-Belsen, and thence presumably to Auschwitz or one of the death camps. So, I also became very interested in this topic. I have a few thoughts--though I make no representation that these are the full and final answers.

It's certainly the case that antisemitism was widespread and deep in Germany prior to the nazis coming to power. Antisemitism there goes all the way back to the first crusade, and perhaps even longer. So there's that element to consider.

Additionally, it should be pointed out that the German people were both confused and oppressed following on their defeat in World War I. Up until roughly 6 weeks before the total surrender of Germany, the news reports in Germany were all positive, portraying to the people that Germany was winning stunning victories and driving back the "invading allies." Reparations imposed by the treaty of Versailles were unfair, and failed to recognize that all the participants in World War I had contributed to both the start of the war, as well as its costly and horrific nature.

To understand how this came to be perceived, put yourself in the shoes of a German citizen of the day. You think Germany is winning the war. Everything is going well. You perceive your country as the defender against aggressive English, French, and American forces, who started this costly war to gain territory and destroy Germany. But the industriousness, the righteousness, and the honorable fighting spirit of the German people are winning against the cowardly and vicious allies. It hasn't been easy; everyone has had to shoulder part of the burden, and so many brave young German men have died defending the Fatherland. Nevertheless, Germany is winning.

But then, just when final victory seems within grasp, those allies are at the German borders, and invasion is immanent. News spreads that the lines have collapsed, supplies are non-existent, and there is now no hope but surrender. The German people were never told that they had been deceived during the final year of the war, that reports had been rosier than the situation itself (although it is true that when the allies turned the tide, they gained success after success very quickly). The natural thought was that somehow, they had been betrayed.

And then came the Weimar republic. Germans who had been wealthy were reduced to extreme poverty almost overnight. People starved. Children ran away and disappeared, as did husbands, wives, brothers and sisters, fathers and mothers. Crime was rampant. Unemployment was sky-high (near 50% at one point). The German people suffered terribly--worse than the Americans did during the Great Depression.

The Nazis sold the fiction that the Jews and the socialists had done the betraying from within, in order to subjugate and destroy the German people. Given how deep antisemitism ran within German culture, it was an easy sell. The man who did the selling was not Hitler, but Joseph Goebbels. My view is that, if you really want to find the heart of evil in the Third Reich, it wasn't Hitler, but rather, Goebbels. His diaries make an interesting read--though they also make me sick to my stomach and the hairs on my arms stand on end. He was aware there was nothing "subhuman" or innately harmful about the Jews. He was interested in seeing how many people could be killed with a lie. Most people who want bad things don't want to want them (I may steal a piece of jewelry because I really want the money, but at the same time, I may also desire not to have those desires). There was none of that in Goebbels. He wanted to be evil, knowing full well what that means.

By contrast, Hitler was delusional. He was nasty and stupid, surely, but he also genuinely believed that the Jews were out to destroy Germany, and they therefore had to be extinguished. This doesn't excuse his actions at all, since it should have been obvious he was wrong. But his character is a little more comprehensible than that of Goebbels, who was so utterly evil and unlike most other individuals as to be not worthy of being called human in my opinion. I think he had a big gaping chasm where most people have a soul.

Without the Nazis, antisemitism would likely have remained diffuse and unfocussed. The holocaust was not inevitable; the Nazis caused it.
 
Methamphetamine is a hell of a drug.

From what I recall, he was reported to have been heavily dependent on opiates. Drugs don't get much better than that, as far as the physical and psychological effects.
 
You don't thinka psychopath in charge of a country should be assassinated?

I wonder how long it will take the FBI to shut down this forum. If it happens, you can all thank this noob moron trying to dishonestly convince people that Obama should be assassinated. The best part is that he's compared Obama to Hitler over and over again. He's argued that if Hitler had been assassinated earlier, things would have turned out better. Then, he turns around and says he's not trying to convince people that assassinating Obama is what he's getting at. You must think people at DP are actually stupid enough to not see through your blatantly ridiculous threads and where you're trying to lead people.
 
Last edited:
Assassinating the head of a democracy is pointless and totally ineffective. The power is in the infrastructure below the leader.
 
I wonder how long it will take the FBI to shut down this forum. If it happens, you can all thank this noob moron trying to dishonestly convince people that Obama should be assassinated. The best part is that he's compared Obama to Hitler over and over again. He's argued that if Hitler had been assassinated earlier, things would have turned out better. Then, he turns around and says he's not trying to convince people that assassinating Obama is what he's getting at. You must think people at DP are actually stupid enough to not see through your blatantly ridiculous threads and where you're trying to lead people.

can you point to the specific post in here that the OP has tried to convince anyone that Obama should be assassinated?

i've read the whole thread and posted my 2 pennies worth... and i'm not seeing what you are seeing.
 
It's also worth noting that Hitler was almost perpetually high as a freaking kite on mind altering medications before the war's end as well.

He was taking a number of pain killing meds for the after effects of the numerous assassination attempts he survived. He was also mixing them with sleep aids and other substances meant to either ease his anxiety or treat his other numerous health problems (he had a famously irritable stomach, for instance, and was always looking for new ways to 'cure' his symptoms).

Combined with the - frankly, understandable - nervous break down he had when it became clear that his regime was doomed, the drugs basically turned him into a raving mad man.

sounds like FDR and his medications
 
I wonder how long it will take the FBI to shut down this forum. If it happens, you can all thank this noob moron trying to dishonestly convince people that Obama should be assassinated. The best part is that he's compared Obama to Hitler over and over again. He's argued that if Hitler had been assassinated earlier, things would have turned out better. Then, he turns around and says he's not trying to convince people that assassinating Obama is what he's getting at. You must think people at DP are actually stupid enough to not see through your blatantly ridiculous threads and where you're trying to lead people.

You have a vivid and delusional imagination
 
From what I recall, he was reported to have been heavily dependent on opiates. Drugs don't get much better than that, as far as the physical and psychological effects.
Yet he never drank alcohol*. In photo ops where everyone else was drinking beer he'd be drinking apple juice.

*- Don't know if never as in "never ever", but for the most part he was pretty much a tea-totaler (sp?).
 
Hitler has the charisma and the evil to make the worst of Germany bubble to the surfaces. IMO if he had been stopped in his rise to power we would have had a different and better world

WWII opened up an incredible era of innovation and change in this world during a century that was already seeing huge advances in science and technology, for all its' suffering, I don't think we'd have a better world without it.
 
WWII opened up an incredible era of innovation and change in this world during a century that was already seeing huge advances in science and technology, for all its' suffering, I don't think we'd have a better world without it.

I don't believe so either. Some of the greatest advances are made as a result of stress, not in times of ease. When things are too sedate, complacency ensues. Who knows why some things happen as they do? There are unpredictable events, and people who don't act as we deem they should. Without evil, there would be no good. Without our Hitlers, there could be no Ghandis. It's a world of paradox and opposites.
 
sounds like FDR and his medications

I can't say. I'm not really sure what FDR may have been using.

Hitler, however, appears to have been on some pretty hardcore sh*t, if sources are to be believed. :lol:

Adolf Hitler's drug habit revealed

AS the father of the “master race” Adolf Hitler had to be the epitome of male virility.

If the Third Reich was to rule the world the supreme leader needed to show his followers he was the perfect specimen of physical and mental health.

But for a hypochondriac, manic depressive with Parkinson’s, allegedly deformed genitals and an almost non-existent sex drive, that was rather a tall order.

The 5ft 8ins Fuhrer knew he was fighting a losing battle with his own mind, body and libido.

So Hitler turned to drugs like cocaine and amphetamines to make him a Nazi superman, developing a habit that may have changed the course of history.

A fascinating TV documentary screened next week reveals the full, shocking story of Hitler’s drug abuse, based on recently-discovered records and letters from his physician Dr Theodore Morell – dubbed the “Reichsmaster of injections” by Nazis

Morell administered a cocktail of more than 80 different drugs, tonics and quack treatments from morphine and barbiturates, vitamins and probiotics to bull semen, rat poison and even oil used to clean guns.
 
Last edited:
I wonder how long it will take the FBI to shut down this forum. If it happens, you can all thank this noob moron trying to dishonestly convince people that Obama should be assassinated.

Say, what?! I don't know about you, but what I am reading, and have been commenting on, throughout the thread, is Hitler, WWII, what would have happened, Jews and the holocaust.

If the forum gets shut down? Are you serious? :lol:
 
Say, what?! I don't know about you, but what I am reading, and have been commenting on, throughout the thread, is Hitler, WWII, what would have happened, Jews and the holocaust.

If the forum gets shut down? Are you serious? :lol:

That's up to you. Once you read the posters history, it's not hard to see what he's getting at.
 
You have a vivid and delusional imagination

Yes, keep trying to hide your purpose as if you're the first one to suggest such stupidity. There was a poster like you a few years ago. ChuzLife. He did the same thing you're doing but with abortion. You're nothing new.
 
can you point to the specific post in here that the OP has tried to convince anyone that Obama should be assassinated?

i've read the whole thread and posted my 2 pennies worth... and i'm not seeing what you are seeing.

I don't expect a libertarian to see the bigger picture. However, if I must:

If someone assassinated Hitler before he fully implemented his agenda the world would have been a lot better off IMO. What about you, is assassination ever okay?

Lifeisshort on Obama

Or maybe he just wants to do like Hitler did, cause such chaos in gov that he is left with no choice other than to declare it broken and take full control.

You have a poster who thinks Obama is trying to do like Hitler did, and then the same poster who asks 'what if Hitler had been assassinated before he implemented his full agenda'? The connection is not hard to see. Unless you're a libertarian.
 
WWII opened up an incredible era of innovation and change in this world during a century that was already seeing huge advances in science and technology, for all its' suffering, I don't think we'd have a better world without it.

I don't think the millions of horrific deaths in WW2 are a fair price for some new technology.
 
I can't say. I'm not really sure what FDR may have been using.

Hitler, however, appears to have been on some pretty hardcore sh*t, if sources are to be believed. :lol:

Adolf Hitler's drug habit revealed


Probably a good thing for the world that Hitler lost his mind from drugs or he may have listened to his generals and we would be typing in German right now.
 
I don't expect a libertarian to see the bigger picture. However, if I must:



Lifeisshort on Obama



You have a poster who thinks Obama is trying to do like Hitler did, and then the same poster who asks 'what if Hitler had been assassinated before he implemented his full agenda'? The connection is not hard to see. Unless you're a libertarian.

If I wanted to ask at what point would it be OK to assassinate a US pres in general or Obama in particular then I would have started one precisely on that subject and I wonder if you got all upset over the George Bush assassination film. Surly it was discussed in here and I bet you defended it. Now in a fit of paranoia you connect dots that are not there and have a panic attack over Obama being compared to Hitler and a subsequent post asking if Hitler should have been assassinated. :roll:


"George Bush assassination film wins top award"

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-405644/George-Bush-assassination-film-wins-award.html
 
I'm conflicted on this one. On the one hand, I think it COULD be useful for law enforcement, however, it's a clear violation of the targets right to a fair trial.

As for the world stage, in peace times, no. This implies the use of forced peace, which is no peace at all. Think about it. We're not at war, but some countries leader (Iran?) says some stuff we don't like, so we have him assassinated. No thanks. Because the same can be applies to us. Bush says some things others didn't like, so they have him assassinated.

Now during war time, assassination is a brilliant tool. We call them snipers.
 
I don't think the millions of horrific deaths in WW2 are a fair price for some new technology.

It has nothing to do with a "fair price". There were multiple attempts on his life. For whatever reason, he survived, and became a defining figure in the history of the world. A question of price has no bearing on the issue. When we need new technology, and we DID need it to put an end to that war, it spurs creativity and innovation. Hitler just happened to be one of the catalysts. If he had been assassinated, there is absolutely no rational reason to believe that the world would have been a better place. Just different players in different scenarios.
 
It has nothing to do with a "fair price". There were multiple attempts on his life. For whatever reason, he survived, and became a defining figure in the history of the world. A question of price has no bearing on the issue. When we need new technology, and we DID need it to put an end to that war, it spurs creativity and innovation. Hitler just happened to be one of the catalysts. If he had been assassinated, there is absolutely no rational reason to believe that the world would have been a better place. Just different players in different scenarios.[/QUOTE]

I just have to disagree with you here. Individual men change the world for better or for worse. Take Christ for example, the world would be far different without him.
 
It has nothing to do with a "fair price". There were multiple attempts on his life. For whatever reason, he survived, and became a defining figure in the history of the world. A question of price has no bearing on the issue. When we need new technology, and we DID need it to put an end to that war, it spurs creativity and innovation. Hitler just happened to be one of the catalysts. If he had been assassinated, there is absolutely no rational reason to believe that the world would have been a better place. Just different players in different scenarios.[/QUOTE]

I just have to disagree with you here. Individual men change the world for better or for worse. Take Christ for example, the world would be far different without him.

Yes, men like Jesus make the world better, and men like Hitler make it worse, but that is necessary. There will never be a world which is all good. There will always be the counterpart to good, because one doesn't exist without the other. That's the reality of the world we live in, and over the march of time, things generally tend to improve. It's a process similar to evolution, except that it deals with concepts and psychological/emotional growth, rather than outward physical characteristics.
 
Its better, IMO, to have rule of law, rather than one man taking the law into his own hands ..
I am in the lower 25% here ..
Even to a Hitler, this applies .. kill Hitler, and we still have a sick German nation ..
Had there been a healthy United Nations in the 30s, a Hitler would have been stopped...
 
From what I understand it might have made sense to eliminate him before he was able to instigate WWII, but once the war started it was probably best to let him stay in charge since strategically he was Germany's own worst enemy.

Something I'm not entirely clear on myself is, how responsible is Hitler personally for the events that led to WWII and the Holocaust? Did he simply ride a tidal wave of historical events? Or did he shape the thoughts of the time so specifically that those events never would have happened had he not lived?
IMO, he became an extremist .. he was "good" at first , but then got carried away ..
 
Yes, men like Jesus make the world better, and men like Hitler make it worse, but that is necessary. There will never be a world which is all good. There will always be the counterpart to good, because one doesn't exist without the other. That's the reality of the world we live in, and over the march of time, things generally tend to improve. It's a process similar to evolution, except that it deals with concepts and psychological/emotional growth, rather than outward physical characteristics.
Evil men should be stomped out and if they were the world would be a better place. I just do not understand why you think evil should be not only tolerated but accepted as normal.
 
Back
Top Bottom