This article argues that the strategy GWB is taking to fight
terrorism sounds eerily familiar to the one that was taken by a certain mustachioed German dictator:
So, what I’d like to know is how much of this is true. I know the
following are facts:
The Reichstag was really bombed by a Dutch Communist sympathizer. It made Hitler into a competent leader (in the Germans’eyes) and secured his power practically overnight.
After the Reichstag incident, Hitler did pass laws limiting
civil liberties in the name of national security.
Hitler didn’t refer to Germany as the Homeland. He referred to it as the Fatherland.
Hitler did invoke God in his speeches and the Nazis did have the motto “Gott Mit Uns” on their beltbuckle. As to whether or not Hitler was a true believer is open to debate (IMO, Bush is a true believer. He does believe God has given him a mission).
Hitler did strike a deal with then British PM Neville Chamberlain and Chamberlain did say it would bring “peace in our time.”
Hitler and his party did equate those who opposed him as anti-
patriotic or anti-German. I don’t know if they actively promoted
the idea that anti-Nazi Germans were a fifth column but I have seen pro-war supporters opine as much (at the anti-war marches
I have attended). Also check out the “Are anti-war protests causing more casualties”
thread if you want to see this logic in action.
Are the similarities in GWB’s and Hitler’s tatics valid or not?
BTW, There was a book called “Shock and Awe” published in 1996. The book does use the German biltzkreig in WWII as an example of “shock and awe”
Comparing Bush to Hitler to suggest they are carrying out similar policies is meaningless conspiracy nuttery. HOWEVER, the Nazi regime, as well as eons of human history, have shown:
The dark side of some of Bush’s policies and some of the goblin-like rhetoric of the right. Most specifically, the strange claim that the only patrotic view is the one that involves blowing people up. Secondarily, the view that anti-war protests implicitiy or explicity aid dictators like Saddam. The contrary to both of these could equally likely be true (and I’m inclined to think the opposite is true. I’ll explain why if people get all snippy and ask.)
The foolishness of Rumsfeld’s war strategy. I understand that he’s putting the preservation of Iraqi lives first and foremost, but he’s really been going about this war like a WarCraft n00b. Instead of securing and providing aid for the cities the army has passed, we’re rushing ahead as quickly as we can. This worked for Germany, maybe it’ll work for us… but it seems like a rash and childish attack only contemplated because the people in charge are absolutely certain of Western military superiority. Let’s hope they are right.
Propoganda, propoganda, propoganda. As a History major (amoung others) it never ceases to amaze me how people are lulled into a sense of emotioinal mob mentality by irrational, anger-driven statements spat out by overfed white men or unwashed jesus lookalikes. Rationality was the mother of our nation, it has been the source of all American progress. Every time our nation gets sucked into this sort of public paranoia and bloodlust, I feel like America is getting a castrated during the orgy of history. Dont you want your nation to keep on pumping, people?
The idea of using attacks against your country (or threats of attacks) to solidify your power and support base and denouncing pacifists as un-patriotic, is a trick that’s been used many, many times. Hitler and Bush happen to just be two that have.
Hey! I didn’t think it was Kosher to attack Rush in this forum. And, do you mean that it would be all right if people followed a Jesus lookalike who bathed daily? JUst what DID Jesus look like? I forget. :rolleyes:
Since his successful diet, Rush Limbaugh is no longer “overfed.” You can see his picture here. Note that his face has changed shape from round to more elongated.
I find it much easier to draw comparisons between Hitler in 1939 and Hussein.
Dictator
Invades other countries with intent to “annex”
Gasses a few million of his own citizens due to cultural differences
Supports and advocates violence against Jews
Cannot be handled diplomatically (breaks treaty/agreements)
Terrifel- That hack about “popular vote” might actually mean something if it were the popular vote that determined who our president is. It isn’t, and hasn’t been for a very long time.
Not sure what your objection is here, Tristan–after all, I was listing dissimilarities. Or are you arguing that Hitler and GWB are somehow similar because one won the popular vote and the other didn’t?
I’m glad you have no problem with my other examples, though.
Florentine_Pogen
Are you aware that you are comparing an American President with arguably the most evil man in the history of civilization? Do you really think that President Bush would gas millions of Democrats if he could “get away with it?” I’m aware that we can all disagree on the politics involved with Republicans and Democrats, but this comparison is ridiculous and disgusting. I’m truly amazed.
Americans and British forces will die in the current war because the Administration is working very hard to insure that collateral damage does not kill Iraqi civilians, and will avoid some targets because of that. These targets will have to be taken out with ground forces who will die in that effort.
Please tell me that you don’t really mean to compare Nazi Germany with the United States. Please
And, do you mean that it would be all right if people followed a Jesus lookalike who bathed daily? JUst what DID Jesus look like? I forget. :rolleyes: