mein kampf

[NYCmitch25]

i dont collect things but the Nazi (axis) memorablilia is incredible.... much cooler than the allies LOL... there techonlogy was years ahead of everyone else - mig, panzer tank, jet engine... etc. he was too austitagious with his gold plated rooms, wardrobe, probably a insecure fag who was 1/2 jewish.

SS honor ring


Nazi Officers


Nazi youth

[NYCmitch25]

Time Man of the year 1939

[Bouncer]

Hitler was a horrible leader.

false.

no matter how evil he was. no matter how many people he killed. you need to take your personal hate for him out of the arguement. to rise to that kind of power from a lowly wounded soldier in world war 1 makes him a great leader. the term "great leader" does not distinguish between bad and good.

[Bouncer]

no different of what bush has done to this country - hitler imo was still a great leader - cant say that about bush

its really not a good argument to compare hitler and bush..

[Bouncer]

Time Man of the year 1939

my point exactly.

its no about good or bad.

[Scrumhalf]

Hitler was a horrible leader. He had a bunch of desperate people that were open to taking a scapegoat. He was no better than the average idiot running for class president making outrageous promises that couldnt be kept. He was a master of propaganda and after taking power he censored everything from books to plays. Religious beliefs were banned, people were forced to work for the labor party and children were forced to join hitlers youth. He ran a police state and criticism against the government was punishable by death, they even had narcs running around reporting it to secret police.

Just mentioning his name in a sentence with great leader is a disgrace. He was a powerful dictator and responsible for some of the most heinous crimes known to man. He took advantage of a post war country in shambles and took advantage of those situations to gain political power.

Look what he did to his country and his people, then ask yourself if he was a good leader. Its disgusting to even suggest such a thing.

I couldn't agree more completely. Hitler was a despot and a tyrant. His brand of using ultranationalism to further his ends has been emulated by other tyrants through the ages (Milosevic, for example) to disastrous results. If Hitler is a great leader, so is Kim of Korea, Pol Pot and Stalin. And look what each of them did to their respective countries.

Hitler ruined Germany. He systematically ran it into the ground - the notion that Hitler was good for Germany at any level is preposterous. By the Holocaust, he systematically rid Germany of many of its best and brightest citizens - scientists, artists, musicians, public servants.

Plus, he was a piss poor military leader. Other than the initial blitzkrieg, the course of WWII is littered with the bad decisions he made to the eventual ruin of the Axis (which of course turned out to be a good thing).

I will make one point of dissent with BBE though. I wouldn't classify the Germans, at least in the interwar years, as innocent in this regard, forced unwillingly to their ruin by their leader. While Hitler demagoguery found purchase with a desperate people who got shafted by WWI and the Treaty of Versailles and subsequently with the ineffective Weimar Republic, the German people had a history of antisemitism and a latent nationalism of a disturbing kind that made them ripe for picking, so to speak, by a leader of Hitler's charisma.

[Bouncer]

I couldn't agree more completely. Hitler was a despot and a tyrant. His brand of using ultranationalism to further his ends has been emulated by other tyrants through the ages (Milosevic, for example) to disastrous results. If Hitler is a great leader, so is Kim of Korea, Pol Pot and Stalin. And look what each of them did to their respective countries.

Hitler ruined Germany. He systematically ran it into the ground - the notion that Hitler was good for Germany at any level is preposterous. By the Holocaust, he systematically rid Germany of many of its best and brightest citizens - scientists, artists, musicians, public servants.

Plus, he was a piss poor military leader. Other than the initial blitzkrieg, the course of WWII is littered with the bad decisions he made to the eventual ruin of the Axis (which of course turned out to be a good thing).

missing the point once again.

the fact that he went from nobody to one of the worlds most powerful men makes him a great leader. sure, it ultimately lead to complete destruction. but almost all "great leaders" come to an end. take a look at Napoleon. i think most consider him a great leader. he died embarrassed and shamed exiled on an island..

forget about "good" or "bad" that is irrelevant.

[Scrumhalf]

missing the point once again.

the fact that he went from nobody to one of the worlds most powerful men makes him a great leader. sure, it ultimately lead to complete destruction. but almost all "great leaders" come to an end. take a look at Napoleon. i think most consider him a great leader. he died embarrassed and shamed exiled on an island..

forget about "good" or "bad" that is irrelevant.

Well, I guess we disagree on what is meant by GREAT.

If a great leader is one that has become all-powerful by subverting the agenda of any reasonable country - to do good and provide for a better life for all its citizens - and to build this country in his perverted view on the bones and ashes (literally) of millions of his citizens, then yes, Hitler was one of the greatest leaders of all.

However, in my book, the GREATNESS of a leader is judged by his legacy. Lincoln was a great leader. Washington was one. And if you want to look at Germany, Bismarck was a million times greater leader than Hitler.

[Bouncer]

Well, I guess we disagree on what is meant by GREAT.

If a great leader is one that has become all-powerful by subverting the agenda of any reasonable country - to do good and provide for a better life for all its citizens - and to build this country in his perverted view on the bones and ashes (literally) of millions of his citizens, then yes, Hitler was one of the greatest leaders of all.

However, in my book, the GREATNESS of a leader is judged by his legacy. Lincoln was a great leader. Washington was one. And if you want to look at Germany, Bismarck was a million times greater leader than Hitler.

going from nobody to VERY powerful = great leader.

great does not = good person or did good things in person. great leader is about getting that power and making other believe and follow.

[Scrumhalf]

going from nobody to VERY powerful = great leader.

great does not = good person or did good things in person. great leader is about getting that power and making other believe and follow.

To their eventual ruin? I guess you and I will have agree to disagree then on what great means in this context.

[Stonecold54]

defining "great leader" would be important in this post, lol.....to me a leader is someone who inspires by moral superiority and unquestionable honor and ethics....someone that other people WANT to follow not out of fear but out of respect. I have to agree with BBexcursion that he was a dictator plain and simple not a leader in the sense that I have defined that word.

[Bouncer]

To their eventual ruin? I guess you and I will have agree to disagree then on what great means in this context.

"Alexander" also known as "Alexander THE GREAT" and his army's killed and stole entire countries simply because they wanted too. they had no right to just take things because they wanted to.

same goes for Julius Caesar or countless other roman emperors. they killed countless numbers of their own people simply because they would breath the wrong way.

these people are largely considered by society to be "Great leaders".

this is the same as the Time Magazine argument. people say, "why make hitler time magazine man of the year", "why make John Gotti time magazine man of the year." its not about the good or bad they do, its about the impact and power they have.

[Bouncer]

he was a dictator plain and simple not a leader in the sense that I have defined that word.

you can be the leader of a mob (Carlo Gambino). you can be the leader of a Colombian cocaine cartel (Pablo Escobar). if you take that mob or cartel to great power, you are a great leader. makes no difference if the intentions are for good or for absolute evil.

[blm]

going from nobody to VERY powerful = great leader.

Coming from nothing to being powerful has nothing to to with true leadership. Sorry, you're arguments seem very distorted. Was he cunning, clever, manipulative, etc...yes. Leader of greatness not even close.

[Bouncer]

Coming from nothing to being powerful has nothing to to with true leadership. Sorry, you're arguments seem very distorted. Was he cunning, clever, manipulative, etc...yes. Leader of greatness not even close.

do you believe that Alexander, Caesar, or Napoleon were great leaders?. explain to me how Hitler was different from any of them.

who would you consider a great leader?