View Full Version : About hitler
Abokasee
03-05-2006, 11:09
Did hitler do anything "positive" or "good" for us humans?
Ultras DVSC
03-05-2006, 11:15
Pff, nice thread, congratulations... :wall:
Byzantine Prince
03-05-2006, 11:27
He popularized that funny moustache. :inquisitive:
Taffy_is_a_Taff
03-05-2006, 14:54
autobahns
ShadesPanther
03-05-2006, 15:38
He shot himself. Although too late.
Justiciar
03-05-2006, 17:12
He ruined fascism by attaching it permenantly to racist ideologies. Ejit. He did give the generations of the time interesting lives, I suppose.. not good.. but hardly mundane.
Duke Malcolm
03-05-2006, 17:59
He ruined fascism by attaching it permenantly to racist ideologies. Ejit. He did give the generations of the time interesting lives, I suppose.. not good.. but hardly mundane.
Eejit? I never known the English to use that word. Quite a Scots/Ulster Scots word...
Anyhoo...
He reduced unemployment in Germany.
Abokasee
03-05-2006, 19:30
he made some pretty good reasearch including the V I/II panther king tiger and possible a flying saucer
Dutch_guy
03-05-2006, 20:08
He shot himself. Although too late.
:laugh4:
:balloon2:
he made some pretty good reasearch including the V I/II panther king tiger and possible a flying saucer
And how did that benefit humanity? I mean that is what you asked.
Besides the autobahns I can't find anything that we could argue was good for 'us humans'.
Besides a lot of hte research wasn't his work, but rather things that were already in the work (although of limited progress at the time).
The jet engine, others were working on it as well. Rocketry would soon reach the V2 level anyway.
There is also some less undevided good things, such as the bunch of very good research into the human body and how to benefit it, but it was reached by vile means (some argue we wouldn't have gotten a lot of that for a very long time without those kinds of disgusting experiments). So I guess it is a strange borderline 'good'. It did us good, but at the same time it most certainly didn't do other humans good at all.
Avicenna
03-05-2006, 20:25
WWII ended the great depression in Europe by giving all the men jobs, if dangerous ones.
Reenk Roink
03-05-2006, 20:46
BEST THREAD EVAR!!! :laugh:
Well, next to "Bartix" ...
Flavius Clemens
03-05-2006, 22:14
WWII ended the great depression in Europe by giving all the men jobs, if dangerous ones.
Casting my mind back to my school A-level economics (which is more than 20 years ago, so not at the cutting edge of current research!) I remember my teacher saying that a case was being made that economically things had actually started to pick up before re-armament programs started. The economic cycle had reached its natural turning point where the vicious cycle of falling demand had gone as far as it could, and expenditure on basic essentials caused growth. He was probably referring to the UK economy rather than the whole of Europe, and of course the arms programme would certainly have had some effect on the speed of recovery.
Alexanderofmacedon
03-06-2006, 03:54
I can't think of anything he did good off the top of my head, but I'd say he really ruined the perception of Germans. Where I live and german is a Nazi, including Rammstein:embarassed:
Papewaio
03-06-2006, 05:57
Whatever good he did was a poor return for all the bad that he inflicted.
but I'd say he really ruined the perception of Germans.
That maybe because Hitler didn't achieve what he did alone... many other nations have had the allure and of facism and turned it down. Sure he may have been the temptor... but the tempted are still responsible for their actions... and the consequences of those... Nuremburg trials did establish that following orders is no excuse for poor judgement.
R'as al Ghul
03-06-2006, 08:02
autobahns
I know you meant it in jest but Hitler did not "invent" them
as is so often thought. From wikipedia:
Autobahns were first conceived, planned, and built on a limited scale in Germany during the Weimar Republic era in the 1920s, but apart from the AVUS in Berlin, construction was slow, and most projected sections did not progress much beyond the planning stage due to economic problems and a lack of political support. One project was the private initiative HaFraBa which planned a "car only road" (the name autobahn was created in 1929) crossing Germany from Hamburg in the North via central Frankfurt am Main to Basel in Switzerland.
Taffy_is_a_Taff
03-06-2006, 14:06
I know you meant it in jest but Hitler did not "invent" them
as is so often thought. From wikipedia:
oh no, what about Volkswagens?
R'as al Ghul
03-06-2006, 16:01
oh no, what about Volkswagens?
He influenced it but the design is older.
Volkswagen
Uesugi Kenshin
03-06-2006, 23:39
Well you can't blame the guy, he did try to come to power earlier. It isn't his fault he wasn't important enough early enough to invent those things.:dizzy2:
Alexanderofmacedon
03-07-2006, 02:29
Okay, I've actually got one. After the atrocity inflicted towards the jews, the UN gave jews all around the world a home country of Isreal.
Strike For The South
03-07-2006, 02:33
I can't think of anything he did good off the top of my head, but I'd say he really ruined the perception of Germans. Where I live and german is a Nazi, including Rammstein:embarassed:
no he didnt you silly goose. Not to mention Isreal is debatable...really debatable....like Backroom debateable
Papewaio
03-07-2006, 02:34
The idea of Israel predates the rise of the Nazis. So it cannot be contributed to them as a silver lining to a very grey cloud.
Balfour Declaration (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balfour_Declaration%2C_1917)
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country." in 1917, by the British...
He gave Hugo Boss the kick-start they needed.
That a man shouldn't marry his niece to get a free house keeper.
BelgradeWar
03-08-2006, 23:49
He showed the world where do the extreme right-wing parties lead to. Same thing the Stalin did to communism.
Lord Winter
03-09-2006, 02:19
Nazi Germany did discover the link between smoking and cancer.
Cronos Impera
03-10-2006, 15:58
The only good thing Hittler did was attacking the Soviet Union and making Stalin be the good guy. This man unwillingly saved communism. The war he unleashed was also good for Russia because it geve the russians some much needed distractions from ethnic and ideological clensings. Hittler saved indirectly 8 million Russians from gulags.
BelgradeWar
03-10-2006, 16:05
The only good thing Hittler did was attacking the Soviet Union and making Stalin be the good guy. This man unwillingly saved communism. The war he unleashed was also good for Russia because it geve the russians some much needed distractions from ethnic and ideological clensings. Hittler saved indirectly 8 million Russians from gulags.
I hope you're joking. Hitler's attack on USSR caused death of about 10 million people and unthinkable economic damage. Communism wouldn't fail either way (with or without the attack), Stalin is still not considered a good guy, and the 8 million figure is not only smaller than 10 mil. killed, but also highly speculative.
Kralizec
03-10-2006, 16:10
I believe that the largest (credible) estimate of Soviet casualties is around 21 million, of wich 14 million were unarmed civilians.
WWII brought us many atrocities that caused a huge "never again!" sentiment and has forcefully reminded of us of the importance of human rights and moral and political values...so indirectly and very much against his own will, Hitler did some good.
BelgradeWar
03-10-2006, 16:16
I believe that the largest (credible) estimate of Soviet casualties is around 21 million, of wich 14 million were unarmed civilians.
WWII brought us many atrocities that caused a huge "never again!" sentiment and has forcefully reminded of us of the importance of human rights and moral and political values...so indirectly and very much against his own will, Hitler did some good.
Yes, I was talking about civilians. With army included, it's such a high toll that I have no words.
I was going to reply to this fellow’s question,…
But then I thought to just get a post out of it.
Avicenna
03-12-2006, 11:38
Please don't http://www.modernsurf.com/spam/spamanm.gif Upxl.
Hitler didn't cause WWII, but he did make it into a world (ie inter continental) war. Hitler tiring out american troops made them not bothered to fight Japan though... and just nuke them.
Finally, my first accusation of spamming.
K. then.
Indirectly he did some good.
He'd shown the world that the wrong man on the wrong place at the wrong time can have devastating consequences.
And some technology that came out of WWII has proven to be very useful.
Especially when you want to blow things up.
InsaneApache
03-12-2006, 17:37
The EU. :inquisitive:
Avicenna
03-13-2006, 14:53
I thought the idea had been around for a while anyway. The UN was post-WWII but just a continuation of the LoN.
I probably get spanked for asking this but,… LoN?
:sweatdrop:
Uesugi Kenshin
03-14-2006, 04:03
League of Nations. The post World War I pet of president Wilson that the US never agreed to, and never really did anything. It died sometime in the mid-thirties iirc.
Avicenna
03-14-2006, 09:20
I'll probably get spanked, but what's iirc or afaik?
The League didn't officially die so early, but it lost all credibility after Japan and Italy invaded countries and nothing happened to either. It was rubbish because only Britain and France were left, and they actually wanted to help Mussolini. The US senate went back to isolation, the Germans joined a bit and left, the Russians joined latest and got booted.
Peasant Phill
03-14-2006, 10:38
[QUOTE=Tiberius]The League didn't officially die so early, but it lost all credibility[QUOTE]
That's right, the LoN wasn't really effective for several reasons.
1. It never had a stable membership. Countries entered and exited all the time. In comparison with the UN, as far as I know only 1 country (Indonesia I think) has left the organization but it rejoined a year later.
2. Its inventor the USA never became part of the organization. The USA may not yet have been the superpower it became after WWII but it was still a major power, a sleeping giant.
3. The LoN treaty was part of the peace treaties of Versailles. It was also seen in that light, as an organization of the victors.
4. France and England (the major powers as said above) thought that by not taking serious steps against Germany for its actions (annexing Austria, its role in the Spanish civil war, ...) they could prevent another Great war. By not condemning (in a serious manner) Germany the LoN failed to achieve its most important goal namely peacekeeping.
On the other hand the LoN did have a purpose as a sort of experiment, a sort of training ground upon which the UN could be build.
Craterus
03-14-2006, 17:59
The LoN also failed because it didn't have it's own army, and it's two strongest powers (GBR and France) weren't willing to commit their armies.
Without an army, the main threats from the League were economic sanctions. These were poorly executed and usually had little or no effect. The Italian Invasion of Abyssinia could have been stopped if they sanctioned oil from Italy. IIRC, they sanctioned everything but oil. :doh:
P.S. IIRC = If I remember (or recall) correctly
AFAIK = As far as I know
Avicenna
03-19-2006, 17:16
No sanctions occurred. Britain and France actually offered more in an attempt to get Italy to stopped. What they managed to do was encourage Italy and show Hitler that attacking others would result in no aggression from the reluctant countries.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.