I mean, they sure know about the evil things Hitler did in Europe, but are they aware of their own cruel history. I am talking about the mass murders, rapes of women, enslaving children and even molesting them, and the infamous Jallianwala Bagh massacre and many more…
And is this told in their schools?
And if they do know, do they feel sorry or are just indifferent?
There are alot of similarities between how Hitler & Hussein ran their countries, including their acts of genocide, attacking every country around them, & horrible accounts of torture & mass murder. The only differences are 1. Hitler was more successful than Hussein & 2. To appease the "Keep America Weak" contingent, America gave Hitler alot more room to carry out his vicious & horrible acts than we gave Saddam (that is to say, we learned from our mistakes from our experience dealing with mad men in the past & used that experience to prevent greater atrocities from happening).
Is there really no situation whatsoever in which America has the right to get involved in foreign affairs to either protect our country from things that are happening now, OR prevent other things that seem most likely to happen down the road? If you think America does have the right to take action (proactive or otherwise) where would you draw the line.
The idea that Iraq’s economy was great before we went over there and ruined it is preposterous. They made a lot of money from the sale of oil (and not much else) and almost all of it went into their military and used to attack their neighbors, or into Saddam’s pocket so he could build new palaces, or bunkers, or fancy car’s for his sons. We have pumped billions of dollars back into their economy and that money would show greater results except there are still so many terrorists loyal to Saddam that they blow their country up on a daily basis requiring us to spend even more money to put the country back together.
There is an old saying I bet everyone has heard a million times that goes “Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.” What exactly do you say one someone tries to fool you a thousand times over a 12-year period, and then people are mad when you do something about it? Shame on America’s educational system?
I would understand if a country wanted to build a nuclear weapon to protect themselves against other nations that had one. I wouldn’t be happy if they said they were going to build it specifically to use it against us or one of our allies particularly right after they attacked one of them – and were unprovoked and unjustified in doing so. If you witness a murder and then the murder turns to you and says, “you’re next”, I doubt you will accept an offer to go for a moonlit stroll. What I meant by being proactive was not that just because we don’t trust someone we should do something aggressive just in case they ever decide to do something against us, but rather to express the idea that if I was stuck down a dark alley with no other way out except to try to get past a guy who was loading a gun and threatening to shoot me as soon as he was done, well I would do whatever I could do to get past the guy and not get shot even if I had to knock him down in my attempt to save my own life.
From reading the extremely anti-American posts that I have seen on this site over the last few months, I get the impression that many people on here believe that it is a much greater “crime” to defend yourself (or others) from terror, torture, murder, or God knows what else, than the crimes of whatever actual horrible things are being done towards you (or someone else). Should we really stick our head in the sand and say “well as long as I don’t see a threat in my hole, I am ok? Does that really protect us from anyone sneaking up from behind to kick us in our big feathery arse?
Saddam Hussein had twelve years to prove he had stopped trying to build a nuclear weapon (which he admitted publicly that he’d use as soon as he was successful) after we had undeniable proof leading up to the first war that he was trying to build (&/or buy) one as quickly as he could. He had missiles that were powerful enough to carry nuclear warheads and hit countries as far away as Israel (even if you don’t like Israel, the point of this is that the distance his missiles could reach was expanding as was the number of things he could do with them) and he was continuing to try to advance his technology right up until the day the second war started. He made continual threats against us. He financially sponsored terrorism in other countries.
He committed acts of genocide against the Kurds and did all sorts of horrible things against his own people. He had stockpiles of Serin and mustard gases (chemical weapons), which we found after the second war began, and some of them have been made into IED’s and used to attack us even after he was out of power. He continued to express hatred towards Kuwait every since we made him give their country back and would have attacked them again in a second if we left. In our defense of them, our navy pilots were attacked by missiles every day for 12 years after the end of the first war.
By proactive, I mean, he was threatening us and attacking us from his side of the dark alley. It’s a good thing we didn’t wait for him to load his gun (increase the range of his missiles well enough to hit us) before we stopped him from doing what he promised us he would do.
And when you think of it, Hitler was not a mass murder at the time, the extermination of the Jews didn’t begin until 1942, while Stalin had doomed off 30 million from 1934-39. Sure Hitler mistreated the Jews during the 30’s, but the high volume extermination didn’t begin until after the Wansee Conference in Jan ‘42.
Casimer, you’re partially right, i wanted to stimulate some thinking, but you’re wrong in me knowing the answer. So far, i think you’ve the best response.
And when you think of it, Hitler was not a mass murder at the time, the extermination of the Jews didn’t begin until 1942, while Stalin had doomed off 30 million from 1934-39.
sure, Hitler mistreated the Jews during the 30’s, but the high volume extermination didn’t begin until after the Wansee Conference in Jan ‘42.
He is required by law to testify before Congress by Sept. 15th. That’s what he’s doing. Why are Americans making excuses for him not taking an oath, by saying he’s only ‘making a report’ – like a kid giving a book report, I guess – rather than testifying?
Why do so Many Americans here on Yahoo just not care that the White House, The Media, and Gen. Petraeus lie to them about our mass murder and torture fest in Iraq?
I’m not a sir, and I’m sure my precious sons don’t find me a waste.
And, btw, your comment is an ‘ad hominem’ response, therefore fallacious, therefore wrong, therefore a waste. G’day.
Of course I would have been with code pink.
Another ad hominem – looks like the Cons just can’t answer the question…..
A surprise!
Germany and Japan attacked us/declared war on us. In the Iraq War, we are the aggressors – we are the germans/japanese in your analogy. Do you really want to go there?
You violent cons are unbelievable – you are like Hitler’s brownshirts.
My father spent his life in the Navy – I never lived anywhere for more than 2 or 3 years because of that.
You are so lame and violent and ridiculous. You just love the boot of the fascist on your face.
I actually really like him, but is he to good to be true?
I’ve never seen anyone strike up so much passion in a crowd since Hitler; I’ve never seen someone so loved and worshipped in propaganda and kitch since Chairman Mau’s little red books and all the other kitch of the Cultural Revolution. Hitler had a few quite likable social policies on education and the like before the whole mass murder of at least two races thing.
I really do like him so far, but he seems to good to be true.
Maybe it will be more ineptitude and ambition which makes things fall apart rather than real evil?
if hell was only temporary how long do you think a person like hitler should be there?
i dont believe in hell but im just curious how long you think a person should be in hell who committed mass murder
BRIDGET: YOU DISGUST ME
ITS A HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION.
ITS A GOD DAMN HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION
JUST ANSWER IT
chaos STFU
half god half ape: sounds about right
i mean your answer sounds about right
The act of theft known by the euphemism of "taxation" is the root cause of all social problems. It empowers criminal gangs calling themselves "governments" to fund the orgies of mass murder and mass destruction of property known as "wars." It funds the counterproductive government regulations and "welfare" programs that destroy economic progress and perpetuate poverty. It funds the awful government schools that indoctrinate children in false ideas, undermine their desire to learn, and ensure that many people are unable to read, write, spell, or do basic math. It empowers the entity that was responsible for slavery, segregation, and every other evil throughout history. It empowers busybody Prohibitionists to commit atrocious crimes against people who engage in actions that they dislike. It empowers those who are against progress to run up the price of gas. It empowered lunatics like Hitler and Stalin to murder millions of people. It empowers certain businesses by giving them a government to use to bankrupt their competition. Taxation is the funding means of the organization which is the enemy of peace, freedom, and prosperity.
Is there anything more compassionate than supporting the absolute abolition of the form of theft called taxation?
Not Obama nor the Dems — wait, aren’t they Pro-choice, for the live butchering of 50 million innocent US babies? They leave Stalin, Hitler in the dust.
Ill name a few:
1)hitler
2) Randy Nicols
3)TIm Mcveigh
4)Alqeida
5)Ted Bundy
6) W Bush
7) BIn laden
Stalin
9) Eric Rudolph
10) IRA (Irish Republican Army)
**79 % of all american serial killers were registered republicans**
Just a question here. Not trying to offend anyone . but like The people I have listed above are all mass murderers yet they are all conservatives. Why is mass murder and terrorism linked with conservatives?