hitler bush ad

[dasant]

Anyone have a link for this ad.

Plus, I can see the similarities...in a sad kind of way. Bush isn't as extreme as Hitler, but if I do remember Hitler wasn’t that way at first...

Hitler lied to a nation
Bush lied to a nation

Hitler took away rights
Bush is trying to take away homosexual rights, and the right to burn an American flag

Hitler started a world aggression
Bush has started a world aggression

No one stopped Hitler at first
No one has stopped bush

Hitler improved his military
Bush is improving our military

Hitler kicked out, all who opposed him
Bush says that if you are anti-war you are unpatriotic

I can see a trend…I could name more, but I think I’m sick to my soul

 

[Vajradhara]

Namaste,

thanks for the post.

it is difficult to judge history in the present... things are always in motion and changing.. every decision that we make as individuals effects the outcome of history, do not dispair!

interestingly, i can use that analogy and draw a similar picture for anyone

Christopher Columbus lied to a nation
Genghis Khan lied to a nation (a tribe really.. but they were like nation-states)

Christopher Columbus took away rights
Genghis Khan actually brought rights to a lot of places... after he killed everyone that disagreed.. and others for examples.

Genghis Khan started a world aggression
Christopher Columbus has started a world aggression

No one stopped Christopher Columbus, at first.
No one has stopped Genghis

Columbus improved his military (Navy, don't ya know)
Genghis is improving our military (tactics and strategy, don't ya know)

Hitler kicked out all who opposed him
Bush says that if you are anti-war you are unpatriotic
(ok.. here, you've got me. both of my guys killed the ones that oppposed them

in any event... you must clearly understand this... it is not the President or any single member of American government that is the underlying problem. you are aware of the "think tanks" and other political instutes, are you not?

it is those organizations from which the non-elected goverment employees are selected. it is these very organizations that have political power for decades that dictate policy by supporting various candidates and legislature. make no mistake about this. for the most part, the elected officials represent the needs of the special interest groups that got them elected... they are beholden unto them for their career.

it really is a shame.. but.. what can you do?

our leaders can spend a lot of time in the Senate but not so much as the President. 8 years isn't a lot of time, really.. in terms of historical perspective... perhaps that's why they feel the need to be so aggressive.. have to leave a mark.

in any event... we can always elect someone else.. but, really.. you are just trading one group for another. the entire process makes me feel very disenfranchised

 

[iBrian]

I may not be enamoured with George W, but the comparison is pertty weak to say the least. You can apply this criteria to most politicians. What you really need to recognise is why Hitler was so particularly different to the norm - and also apply that same criteria to Hirohito and Stalin (after all, both of those are held accountable to a larger number of civilian deaths - but so long as those deaths belonged to our Cold War enemies they didn't seem to matter).

 

[dasant]

interesting but not correct

Of course you can compare Hitler to many people in our history. That still does not rid the fact that we let Columbus do this, and Genghis do these deeds. The fact that yes, they have done them, does not mean they are right. Do we really want this to be repeated, because I sure don’t?

Do you think that I’m not aware of my own government? Do you think I’m not aware that it is, not completely bush’s fault?

But this still reminds, it wasn’t all Hitler’s fault, now was it. But who got almost 100 percent of the blame? Adolf Hitler.

Furthering when you are the president and you give speeches, you are thus taking responsibility for all actions that have taken place under your party. He makes the final decision, and he in return gets all the criticism.

If you hit the top of the line ‘bush’, you will knock the rest down.

A war filled aggression should be based on factual information. Bush has provided us with untruthful facts, meaning his mark has been useless and unfactual…and as far as I can tell unnecessary.

 

[iBrian]

Bush is merely the frontman of a far large and more persistent corporate-military industrial complex. You can also remove the frontman - heck, it's part of the US constitution - but the band will keep playing a tune for some puppet to dance to at front of stage.

Hitler, on the other hand, was the sole ideological power behind the Nazi Party. He was the puppeteer in full public view.

 

[Anzac]

All leaders are like that in the first place, having power and abusing it - Hitler could easily be compared to even the "best" of nation-state leaders because of the power circles.

Although I would be inclined to agree with you I don't think there is any really strong comparison to be held. Aside the fundamentalist religious view against non-white and homosexual people there aren't very many ideological similarities between the two. It is merely the political apparatus that is the same.

However, what you could say is both try/succeed in destroying democracy by democracy.