BF2S Forums Hitler was 'Doing God's Work'

Spark wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

How d'you figure?

*The Fascism is evil part, not the rest*

Please explaaaain

How do you figure that Fascism is evil?

What's inherently evil about tyranny?

Also, I'd argue as to whether Fascism and racism are inherently related.  Just because the most famous Fascist was also a racist doesn't mean they all are.

24 civilians shot in the head at close range is all the evidence needed really.
Failing to investigate, failing to gather any evidence says enough about the commanders on the ground.
Failing to call any witnesses, failing to bring a charge more serious than manslaughter says a lot about the prosecution.

I haven't seen any evidence of Iranian weapons being recovered in Iraq, until then I'm not willing to accept it exists.

Spark wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

What's inherently evil about tyranny?

Also, I'd argue as to whether Fascism and racism are inherently related.  Just because the most famous Fascist was also a racist doesn't mean they all are.

No, but they advocate above all things the welfare of the state over anything else. Above the needs of the people of the state, and certainly above the need of other states.

The logical extension of which...

characterized by a centralized autocratic state governed by a dictatorial head, stringent organization of the economy and society, and aggressive repression of opposition.

I didn't say that was tyranny per se, but I don't see it going anywhere good too fast.

I suppose it was fine a few hundred years ago, when states weren't really defined, communication was poor yet states were much, much larger than they were today - it was the only way they kept people in line.

But today? No way.

Why?  What if your belief is that the state should be valued above all else?  There's certainly some of that is patriotic sentiment which is still strong in, among other places, the US.

Dilbert_X wrote:

24 civilians shot in the head at close range is all the evidence needed really.
Failing to investigate, failing to gather any evidence says enough about the commanders on the ground.
Failing to call any witnesses, failing to bring a charge more serious than manslaughter says a lot about the prosecution.

I haven't seen any evidence of Iranian weapons being recovered in Iraq, until then I'm not willing to accept it exists.

Here you go Dil... With pictures for your viewing pleasure.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/ … ranian.php

The Laws For the Protection of German Blood and Honour wrote:

Section 4
Jews are forbidden to display the Reich and national flag or the national colours.
On the other hand they are permitted to display the Jewish colours. The exercise of this right is protected by the State.

For a regime who was suppose to kill all the jews, that section is surprising.

I sense a disturbing undercurrent in this thread.

Which isn't what we're discussing.  What we're discussing is whether Tyranny is inherently evil.

Here you go Dil... With pictures for your viewing pleasure.
http://www.longwarjournal.org/archives/ … ranian.php

I see lots of pictures of weapons, no proof they came from Iran.

ZombieVampire wrote:

Okay, that's 2.

You can add Saddam, Idi Amin and Mao to that, oh yeah and Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il.

ZombieVampire wrote:

And killing opponents is evil?  Wow, the US is in big trouble.

Political opponents within one's own country, heard of the Matteotti Murder? The squadristi waging violence against others? Burning of political opponents offices and buildings? I've yet to see that happening on US soil, particularly these kinds of acts being ordered by the President or leader of a party. I don't see the whole idea of that being one of good nature do you?

ZombieVampire wrote:

I think you'll find it's much higher than that.  Further, many of them were caused by incompetence which, last time I checked, wasn't on the evil checklist.

Funny how leaders can't be blamed as being somewhat bad by you when millions of people in their country mysteriously just die.

ZombieVampire wrote:

Even if we assume that he is a tyrant (a bit of a stretch), he's only been one recently.  Further, I fail to see how attacking political opponents is "evil"

I reckon he's been one ever since he got into power in the 80's, only just surfaced because of increased media coverage.

ZombieVampire wrote:

Even if we assume that you're right on all of those, it's:

a)  Not a complete list of tyrants, and not even a complete list of modern tyrants

b)  Even demonstrating that all tyrants have been evil, it does not prove that Tyranny is

Might not prove it but there's a more than average link between Tyranny and very evil and murderous individuals.

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire wrote:

Okay, that's 2.

You can add Saddam, Idi Amin and Mao to that, oh yeah and Kim Il Sung and Kim Jong Il.

Which still isn't a complete list, is it?

Further, Mao is still up in the air.

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire wrote:

And killing opponents is evil?  Wow, the US is in big trouble.

Political opponents within one's own country, heard of the Matteotti Murder? The squadristi waging violence against others? Burning of political opponents offices and buildings? I've yet to see that happening on US soil, particularly these kinds of acts being ordered by the President or leader of a party. I don't see the whole idea of that being one of good nature do you?

But you went further: you said it was evil.  Which is a few steps beyond "not moral".  Big steps.

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire wrote:

I think you'll find it's much higher than that.  Further, many of them were caused by incompetence which, last time I checked, wasn't on the evil checklist.

Funny how leaders can't be blamed as being somewhat bad by you when millions of people in their country mysteriously just die.

Wow, way to totally ignore what I said.  Good job.

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire wrote:

Even if we assume that he is a tyrant (a bit of a stretch), he's only been one recently.  Further, I fail to see how attacking political opponents is "evil"

I reckon he's been one ever since he got into power in the 80's, only just surfaced because of increased media coverage.

Which explains how he won those elections.  But you're right, you're clearer smarter than all the political leaders and commentators on the planet.  Carry on.

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire wrote:

Even if we assume that you're right on all of those, it's:

a)  Not a complete list of tyrants, and not even a complete list of modern tyrants

b)  Even demonstrating that all tyrants have been evil, it does not prove that Tyranny is

Might not prove it but there's a more than average link between Tyranny and very evil and murderous individuals.

Well of course there is.  People tend not to elect those who kill them.  But the discussion isn't whether you're more likely to get an evil government in a Tyranny, or even whether you're more likely to die or be killed in a Tyrannic system, it's whether Tyranny is inherently evil.

So because Mugabe won those elections, he's a good guy who didn't use bullying, beatings and threats to get votes cast for him? If you sincerely believe that then frankly your head has been stuck in the ground.

Besides, wtf does it matter if its not a complete list? You got a list full of your well-to-do tyrants?
I have no idea for what reason you're trying to justify and defend tyranny like but as far as I see, judging by the individuals who fall under the veil of the word tyranny, then yes it is inhernetly evil and murderous and Tyrannic regimes, every one of those I've heard of are nothing more than brutal political machines.

Also in the case of Mao, say I killed someone with my car by incompetence, that mean I'm not to blame?

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

So because Mugabe won those elections, he's a good guy who didn't use bullying, beatings and threats to get votes cast for him? If you sincerely believe that then frankly your head has been stuck in the ground.

Where did I say any of those things?

Then why use this line which (as usual contains some smartass quirk) had virtually nothing to do with what I said? vv

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Which explains how he won those elections.  But you're right, you're clearer smarter than all the political leaders and commentators on the planet.  Carry on.

I didn't say at any point that nobody else knew what was going on, you said that he had only become a tyrant recently. Mugabe's been one since the day he got the job and I'm pointing out that the only reason it appears he became one recently is because of increased media coverage, coverage now is bigger than coverage then.

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Besides, wtf does it matter if its not a complete list? You got a list full of your well-to-do tyrants?

If you're attempting to prove that Tyranny is inherently evil through a list of tyrants, then you'd need to prove that every tyrant ever is evil (and even then you wouldn't actually have proven anything other than the fact that every tyrant ever is evil).  I'm not trying to prove my point by list.

So how do you prove tyranny isn't evil then?

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

I have no idea for what reason you're trying to justify and defend tyranny

ATM, I'm succeeding.  I was simply responding to a post by Kmarion.

That's not answering that either, 'ATM, I'm succeeding' doesn't tell anyone why you feel the need to defend tyranny and/or tyrants.

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

like but as far as I see, judging by the individuals who fall under the veil of the word tyranny, then yes it is inhernetly evil and murderous and Tyrannic regimes, every one of those I've heard of are nothing more than brutal political machines.

And every American president I've heard of is white.  Does that mean that the US Presidency is inherently a post for white people?

Yet at the minute the next one appears like he's going to be black, so no. Reason for the line of white presidents is
A) There are more white Americans
B) So far I haven't heard of anyone other than Obama, being black, running for the Presidency

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Also in the case of Mao, say I killed someone with my car by incompetence, that mean I'm not to blame?

Where did I say Mao isn't to blame?

Well apparently despite the vast number of people killed at his hands he couldn't be listed as a tyrant by you as you said that only Hitler, Stalin and Saddam qualified for it.

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

So because Mugabe won those elections, he's a good guy who didn't use bullying, beatings and threats to get votes cast for him? If you sincerely believe that then frankly your head has been stuck in the ground.

Where did I say any of those things?

Then why use this line which (as usual contains some smartass quirk) had virtually nothing to do with what I said? vv

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Which explains how he won those elections.  But you're right, you're clearer smarter than all the political leaders and commentators on the planet.  Carry on.

And during that I say he's a good guy and doesn't use bullyings, beatings or threats.............where?

Yeah I didn't say that you said that. But your line states that he won the elections, I'm pointing out the methods used to get those votes. You're basically saying that there's nothing wrong with the way it was carried out because he was elected.

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

I didn't say at any point that nobody else knew what was going on, you said that he had only become a tyrant recently. Mugabe's been one since the day he got the job and I'm pointing out that the only reason it appears he became one recently is because of increased media coverage, coverage now is bigger than coverage then.

Again: he was elected, and he had to face re-election.

Which he won because he used violent methods.

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Besides, wtf does it matter if its not a complete list? You got a list full of your well-to-do tyrants?

If you're attempting to prove that Tyranny is inherently evil through a list of tyrants, then you'd need to prove that every tyrant ever is evil (and even then you wouldn't actually have proven anything other than the fact that every tyrant ever is evil).  I'm not trying to prove my point by list.

So how do you prove tyranny isn't evil then?

By looking at the system and what's inherent to it.  For example, voting is inherent to democracy.

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

I have no idea for what reason you're trying to justify and defend tyranny

ATM, I'm succeeding.  I was simply responding to a post by Kmarion.

That's not answering that either, 'ATM, I'm succeeding' doesn't tell anyone why you feel the need to defend tyranny and/or tyrants.

ZombieVampire! wrote:

ATM, I'm succeeding.  I was simply responding to a post by Kmarion.

I don't care if you're responding to Kmarions post, I'm asking for why you feel the need to defend it or why you feel you're succeeding in defending it. All you've posted up so far is that not all tyranny is evil but nothing has backed this up.

M.O.A.B wrote:

ZombieVampire! wrote:

Where did I say Mao isn't to blame?

Well apparently despite the vast number of people killed at his hands he couldn't be listed as a tyrant by you as you said that only Hitler, Stalin and Saddam qualified for it.

I never disputed whether he was a tyrant, I disputed whether he was evil.  There's a big differene between "to blame" and "evil".

I think have several million people killed because they don't match your view is evil. Hitler did the same thing with the jews, Stalin did the same thing with peasants, if you don't think they were evil in their ways then I have no idea what you think evil is.

And you still haven't answered why its not evil.