• 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
radcen said:
He used the electoral process to gain seats/power in the Reichstag, and eventually to set himself in a position to be appointed. His underlying tactics in gaining popularity to secure votes were often criminal, but using the electoral process in and of itself was legit.
Click to expand...

Adolf Hitler, who was sworn in as Chancellor of Germany four weeks before, on 30 January, urged President Paul von Hindenburg to pass an emergency decree to suspend civil liberties in order to counter the "ruthless confrontation of the Communist Party of Germany".[4] After passing the decree, the government instituted mass arrests of Communists, including all of the Communist parliamentary delegates. With their bitter rival Communists gone and their seats empty, the National Socialist German Workers Party went from being a plurality party to the majority; which enabled Hitler to consolidate his power with the Nazis eager to uncover Comintern complicity.
Click to expand...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reichstag_fire

That's not legit.
 
KevinKohler said:
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.
Click to expand...

Eh. As far as I'm concerned, it's pretty much always fair game if the ends justify the means.

After all, just because we refrain from taking out certain targets doesn't mean that everyone else will. Some of those people might be our rivals, and actively working against us.

I frankly wish that we'd be adopt a more "Israeli" approach, and be more active in taking out the key scientists involved in Iran or North Korea's nuclear programs. It'd solve a lot of problems.
 
Last edited:
"irst impeachment. Then conviction and removal from office. Then arrest him for treason, for waging war openly and brazenly against the American citizen, the nation and the Constitution. Once convicted seek the death penalty in the punishment phase."
Cardinal said:
Hoooooookay. [backs away slowly and carefully]
Click to expand...
Are you objecting to the legal proceedings or do you simply prefer authoritarian statism no matter the cost to the nation?
 
Misterveritis said:
"irst impeachment. Then conviction and removal from office. Then arrest him for treason, for waging war openly and brazenly against the American citizen, the nation and the Constitution. Once convicted seek the death penalty in the punishment phase."

Are you objecting to the legal proceedings or do you simply prefer authoritarian statism no matter the cost to the nation?
Click to expand...

"Other."
 
lifeisshort said:
Exactly my point, a tyrant worth assassinating can rise to power through a democracy
Click to expand...

Nobody is arguing against that. You seemed to be arguing that because Hitler was elected, he wasn't a candidate for assassination because he represented a 'democracy'. I've heard Nazi Germany described as many things, but a democracy isn't one of them.
 
Misterveritis said:
Having offered evidence that you are trolling we are done. Take the last word if you like.
Click to expand...

I will, thank you. In one thread, you've acknowledged that it was "quaint" that the only acceptable choices were between two extremes, whereas here you are presenting only two extremes as acceptable choices. It seems that presenting two extremes is permissible so long as you're the one doing it.
 
Misterveritis said:
"irst impeachment. Then conviction and removal from office. Then arrest him for treason, for waging war openly and brazenly against the American citizen, the nation and the Constitution. Once convicted seek the death penalty in the punishment phase."

Are you objecting to the legal proceedings or do you simply prefer authoritarian statism no matter the cost to the nation?
Click to expand...

I think he's objecting to the loonification of Republican politics.
 
Wiggen said:
Nobody is arguing against that. You seemed to be arguing that because Hitler was elected, he wasn't a candidate for assassination because he represented a 'democracy'. I've heard Nazi Germany described as many things, but a democracy isn't one of them.
Click to expand...

Hitler wasn't democratically elected!! :scared:
 
Wiggen said:
Nobody is arguing against that. You seemed to be arguing that because Hitler was elected, he wasn't a candidate for assassination because he represented a 'democracy'. I've heard Nazi Germany described as many things, but a democracy isn't one of them.
Click to expand...

On the contrary I believe he should have been assassinated. He rose to power in a democracy but then destroyed the system that elected him
 
lifeisshort said:
He rose to power in a democracy but then destroyed the system that elected him
Click to expand...

Lies. His party never had more than 33% of parliament. He managed that on a watered down platform devoid of his radial stances. He then changed the rules illegally and seized power by force.

He faked his way into a little influence, under false pretense, and rose to power by force.

Pretending his ideals were voted into office is a load of crap spewed by neo nazis in ignorant attempt to validate his garbage.

Learn some history.
 
lifeisshort said:
On the contrary I believe he should have been assassinated. He rose to power in a democracy but then destroyed the system that elected him
Click to expand...

Cute choice of words. You've been shown repeatedly that he and the Nazi party weren't elected democratically, so instead you try to hold on to your position by saying he "rose to power in a democracy." Fact is though that even this rewording doesn't help you make the argument that he rose to power through any democratic process. If I said, "Joe committed murder in a country with law and order." that doesn't mean that Joe's crime was lawful, it still means that he broke the law and committed murder.
 
Goshin said:
I'm not opposed to assassination in some cases, but one of the problems with it is that when there is an established power structure, the next bozo just steps into the vacated place... and in many cases he may be as bad or worse.
Click to expand...

Yup

Sometimes ( unfortunately ) letting the guy implement his Policies and or mandates is a far more effective mechanism for change.
 
Wiggen said:
You are correct. The man who appointed him Chancellor was, however.
Click to expand...

Which still isn't kosher. Let's say the US has a parliamentary system and the Republicans are voted into power, and then the Republicans turn around and appoint Obama to be head of the government. That would be super super skeevy because the people voted for one party, only to get somebody from a completely opposing party in charge. I'm not an expert on democracy, but there's no way that's especially democratic. Some serious back room dealing went on there.

Anyway, the idea that Hitler was democratically elected needs to die right here and now and for all perpetuity.
 
Last edited:
lifeisshort said:
I don't think the millions of horrific deaths in WW2 are a fair price for some new technology.
Click to expand...
Fair.

Also, a lot more than just new technology came from the war, and that technology was no small deal, just to add.
 
lifeisshort said:
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?


February 1933
The German Reichstag is destroyed by fire. The plot and execution is almost certainly due to the Nazis but they point the finger at the communists and trigger a General Election.


March 1933
The Enabling Act passed—powers of legislation pass to Hitler’s cabinet for four years, making him virtual dictator.

He proclaims the Nazi Party is the only political party permitted in Germany. All other parties and trade unions are disbanded. Individual German states lose any autonomous powers, while Nazi officials become state governors.


April 1933
Communist party banned.


May 1933
Socialists, Trade Unions and strikes banned.


October 1933
Hitler withdraws from the League of Nations. In the following months, he trebles the size of the German Army and ignores the arms restrictions imposed by the Treaty of Versailles.


June 1934
Night of the Long Knives. Hitler crushes all opposition within his own party—thus eliminating any of his rivals.


July 1934
After the death of President Hindenburg, Hitler becomes “Fuehrer and Reich Chancellor” and abolishes the title of President.


1935
Hitler re-arms Germany with the aim of undoing the Treaty of Versailles and uniting all the German peoples. Military conscription is introduced.


March 1938
The Austrian Chancellor, leader of the Austrian Nazi Party, invites the German army to occupy Austria and proclaim a union with Germany.
Click to expand...

Hitler was just another head of state up until he started entering other countries; regardless of what he was he doing in Germany... The Polish or Russian governments could have assinated him, but they didn't. Nobody assinated Hussein or any other dictator in the ME either. Until GW Bush. These ISIS people are not heads of state of any kind, so they can go.
 
radcen said:
*sigh* The years leading up to that. Late 20s, up to 1932. The Nazis made fairly steady gains in the Reichstag in popular elections and that helped set the scenario that led to Hitler's appointment. Without said gains in the Reichstag, Hitler never would have been appointed.
Click to expand...

For the life of me I can't figure out what your point is. "Fairly steady gains" ≠ taking power democratically.
 
radcen said:
I can tell. You seem focused on a single event and unwilling to look in other directions.
Click to expand...

Well how far back in the "other direction" do I have to go? To when Hitler was legitimately elected town councilman?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom