Big Muddy

[SparrowHawk]

Forgive me Sparrow.
While I understand your your displeasure with the POTUS, I've come to Expect More from you, specifically your use of the word "Fuhrer" for it's Obvious Vileness.
I think you'd agree that there's a vast difference between the word..."Politbureau........and Fuhrer", albeit the ploitbureau was no "boy scout organization" .

Thank you,
joanne

Josef Stalin with the assistance of the Politbureau slaughtered far more russian civilians than there were jews in Europe. The estimate is in the 30 MILLION range. Highest estimate I've seen for Hitler was 12 Million total. So comparing Hitler and the Politbureau is not only appropriate it's mandatory.

Sorry to say but for me Barack Obama and his unbridled arrogance remind me of despots from history.

 

[Garfield1966]

If you don;t like Obama fine. I get that. I cannot stand Bush or Cheney either but I would not refer to them as Hitler or the Fuhrer.

I believe your comparison of Stalin and Hitler fail on one major count. Stalin was murdering people indiscriminately to maintain power (not that it makes it OK) while Hitler was murdering people to exterminate a people/religion. He was not only going after jews but gypsy, gays, and anyone else who did not fit his image of a perfect German. Hitler had power that was not being threatened. Hitler was seeking to create a master race and to eliminate anyone who did not fit that requirement.

I am not arguing that Stalin was a nice guy. All I am saying is that based on goals, I think Hitler adds a extra layer of F%^^ed upedness that Stalin did not have. Yes the people are dad and why may not matter to them but when looking at history I think Hitler has a special place. Perhaps it is my bias since I lost some family in the camps and my mother and father are survivors but I think my rational stands up well.

Just my opinion.

 

[SparrowHawk]

I believe your comparison of Stalin and Hitler fail on one major count. Stalin was murdering people indiscriminately to maintain power (not that it makes it OK) while Hitler was murdering people to exterminate a people/religion. He was not only going after jews but gypsy, gays, and anyone else who did not fit his image of a perfect German. Hitler had power that was not being threatened. Hitler was seeking to create a master race and to eliminate anyone who did not fit that requirement.

So enlighten me please. Were those murdered by Stalin any less dead?

I am not arguing that Stalin was a nice guy. All I am saying is that based on goals, I think Hitler adds a extra layer of F%^^ed upedness that Stalin did not have. Yes the people are dad and why may not matter to them but when looking at history I think Hitler has a special place. Perhaps it is my bias since I lost some family in the camps and my mother and father are survivors but I think my rational stands up well.

Genocide is genocide regardless of motive. IIRC most of Stalin's opposition came from one group ethnically so in essense he was no different than Uncle Adolf.

I've only ever seen one tattoo from the camps and that was enough for me. My Uncle was with Patton's 3rd Army and I know he liberated some camps and I remember that my uncle told me they didn't eat for a week as they gave all the food they had to the prisoners. Remember history is written by the victor and Stalin was our ally at the time. As a result history treats his murerous thuggery differently.

 

[Garfield1966]

Yes dead is dead but I think hit man who kills someone is not as bad as Manson who tortures and then kills someone.

I was under the impression from what I have read that Stalin killed those who he thought were a threat to his power. Granted his paranoia made everyone a 'threat' so I don't know how valid that is. I still think Hitler is in a class by him self do to the intent behind is actions and the level of organization and resources that were dedicated. JMHO.

Like I said, I have family history there. My dad as a number on his arm so perhaps my perspective and judgment are a bit skewed.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Yes dead is dead but I think hit man who kills someone is not as bad as Manson who tortures and then kills someone.

I was under the impression from what I have read that Stalin killed those who he thought were a threat to his power. Granted his paranoia made everyone a 'threat' so I don't know how valid that is. I still think Hitler is in a class by him self do to the intent behind is actions and the level of organization and resources that were dedicated. JMHO.

Like I said, I have family history there. My dad as a number on his arm so perhaps my perspective and judgment are a bit skewed.

I guess I'm just more bottom line oriented. Somewhere betwee 20 and 50 million people died needlessly at the hands of two despots. The reasoning,justification or excuse matters little to me. Dead is Dead and these people were murdered in quantity under orders from two despots.

Arguing over which one was more heinous is a lot like arguing about who was more drunk at the frat party - The passed out face down in his own vomit guy or the guy who crapped his pants while passed out.

 

[Garfield1966]

I understand that. I guess the point that joann was making and I agree with is that comparing Bush or Obama to Hitler is not fair or accurate. Millions of people did not die under either of them and it diminishes the atrocities when used in this manner.

 

[xUT]

Moderator,
Please close this 'discussion' as it has nothing to do with the OP post.
Thanks,
xUT