It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Has there ever been.......

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 08:06 PM
link   
Has there ever been another president in American history that has been compared to Hitler as much as Bush? This is a question that has recently come to mind. I remember all the conservative Clinton bashing, but I can not ever remember someone comparing him to Hitler, much less provide proof for the accusation. With Bush, its different. I have noticed a large portion of Liberals, me included, make the comparison between Bush and Hitler. Im wondering if this isnt a telling factor of where our governing society is heading.




posted on Dec, 22 2004 @ 10:08 PM
link   
Since Hitler is a younger face of evil (50 years or so) I doubt it, but I bet many presidents before Bush were being compared to evil men. I remember once Lincoln was compared to Nero by some and a couple people feared he would become a tyrant.

People will always compare presidents to evil unsavory characters even if they are doing a good job or were good leaders like Lincoln.

Plus Clinton was'nt a war time president or did much millitary action during his term, so there was not much room for Hitler comparions.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 07:42 AM
link   
Good point Jedimaster. But still, in the history of the US, there has never been a president as hated as Bush. I have never heard these accusations put forth towards any other president. I did some research, and you right about Lincoln being compared to Nero. But I cant find any other references to hatred of a president as Bush has garnered.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 08:42 AM
link   
I don't think so...

It's been worrying me to, a White, Straight, Christian, Right Wing America is his goal... And of course, conquering his "Axis Of Evil" List, which contains pretty much half the world, many unexplained ones. He's trying to spread the American way of life to those who don't want it's corruption. Hence inspiring more hatred for America. Pretty funny situation if it wasn't so dangerous to innocent Americans who hate Bush and realise how bad he is.

Yeah, he seems like the new Hitler. Good job he'll be out next election time, if its not to late by then.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 09:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Good point Jedimaster. But still, in the history of the US, there has never been a president as hated as Bush. I have never heard these accusations put forth towards any other president. I did some research, and you right about Lincoln being compared to Nero. But I cant find any other references to hatred of a president as Bush has garnered.


The reason for this is because we have a very vocal minority. Democrats, when they don't get their way, basically like to protest and cry. When was the last time you saw a crowd of angry Republican protesters?

When your party, and your ideaology, are soundly defeated by the "silent majority" and you can't defend your own policies. The only thing you can do is demonize your opponent, and cry about it. Most people realize this and take the hate-filled rhetoric with a grain of salt. They know the accusers are losers and ignore it.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 10:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Good point Jedimaster. But still, in the history of the US, there has never been a president as hated as Bush. I have never heard these accusations put forth towards any other president. I did some research, and you right about Lincoln being compared to Nero. But I cant find any other references to hatred of a president as Bush has garnered.


That is true, he may be the number one president with the most vocal hatred this size. It may because many more people are getting into poltiics instead of brushing it aside.

But another president with a lot of hatred during his term comes to mind...

Richard Milhouse Nixon.

Many folk hated him before Watergate and many more after it.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 12:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by JediMaster


Richard Milhouse Nixon.

Many folk hated him before Watergate and many more after it.


Yeah, people did hate him didnt they. I still remember watching footage of him spinning around and giving the double peace sign, and being boo'd. I would have liked to see it live, just for the sheer comedy of it.



posted on Dec, 23 2004 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Carseller4
When was the last time you saw a crowd of angry Republican protesters?



Thats the problem I have with this line of thinking. Im not criticizing, just giving an opinion. Why would the republicans have anything to complain about lately?
They have secured an 8 year bid in the majority leadership of this country. The taxlaws are being passed in favor of republicans (money wise, there are MANY more reps than dems) I really dont see why they WOULD complain.

However, there was MUCH complaint from the conservatives when Bill Clinton was in office. Granted it wasnt at the level it was now, but it still had its moments.

With this in mind, it seems to me that this backlash from the Liberal side is due to the Liberals not believing the President is performing his job correctly. If Im right in this assumption, then let me take this a bit further. The reason there wasnt vehement hate towards the president in the past, is because everybody generally agreed with the president of the time. Its not just the Liberals I hear screaming. I have met quite a few Conservatives that are fed up with Bush. There are one or two of them here at ATS. There have always been dessinters, but never has it been like this. So by following this thought, can we actually conclude that Bush is not doing a good job?I mean since the people screaming are from both sides, it would seem that way.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 11:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by Teh_Gerbil
I don't think so...

It's been worrying me to, a White, Straight, Christian, Right Wing America is his goal... And of course, conquering his "Axis Of Evil" List, which contains pretty much half the world, many unexplained ones. He's trying to spread the American way of life to those who don't want it's corruption. Hence inspiring more hatred for America. Pretty funny situation if it wasn't so dangerous to innocent Americans who hate Bush and realise how bad he is.


Find me a quote or an action of his that exemplifies his wanting a white Right Wing America? I know he's against gay marriage, but he's for civil union. He doesn't hate the gays, just as Christianity doesn't hate the gays. He doesn't want the gays out of this country, where does he ever say that? I know that he plans to create those temporary work visas, which will allow illegal immigrants to get work permits in the U.S. for a limited time. Yeah, really racist! The American way of life is one of corruption? What kind of person are you? Do you live in America?



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 05:53 PM
link   
Nazi Germany was pretty much a police state. Check out the Patriot and 2 acts.

Hitler had any anti-Nazi groups locked up in concentration camps. Check half the folks in Gautanamo, they are being held without sufficient evidence at all.

And Hitler persectuted Jews. Think of how persectuded Arabs are now, even in the good ol' Free US of A.

Also, Germany used the power of its Military, the Worlds strongest at hte time, to boss around the world. USA anyone?

Hitler said he wanted a united Europe too. Bush may say this but just like Hitler, he wants HIS vision of civil unity.

Right iwngers tend to be very strongly partiotic, and like to indentify a "Set enemy" For Hitler it was Jews, and Bush its the Arabic nations, wether or not they pose a threat. Just like the Jews in Nazi Germany.

He obviously wont come clean until its to late, like Hitler. And it'll happen again, as always. War is terrible yet seems inevitable.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 08:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Teh_Gerbil
Nazi Germany was pretty much a police state. Check out the Patriot and 2 acts.


And what about Canada's bill? It said almost the exact same thing as our patriot act, but got no attention. I'm not sure on the specifics, but pistolpete created a thread or two about it. Are they nazi as well?


And Hitler persectuted Jews. Think of how persectuded Arabs are now, even in the good ol' Free US of A.


The Arabs are "Persectuted"? Even if you spell it right, give me a break!!! Hitler spoke directly to his country calling the Jews rats, among other things. Hitler publicly announced that he hated the Jews. The only thing Bush wants to take out, and has announced it publicly is terrorists! He has said NOTHING about disliking or distrusting Arabs in general.


Hitler said he wanted a united Europe too. Bush may say this but just like Hitler, he wants HIS vision of civil unity.


Bush wants a united country? This is comparible to hitler how?


Right iwngers tend to be very strongly partiotic, and like to indentify a "Set enemy" For Hitler it was Jews, and Bush its the Arabic nations, wether or not they pose a threat. Just like the Jews in Nazi Germany.

It's true that right "iwngers" tend to be pretty "partiotic". So what? That's a good thing! We've identified the Arab nations as our enemy? Where!? Bush 's plan is to fight FOR them! We're trying to help them!


He obviously wont come clean until its to late, like Hitler. And it'll happen again, as always. War is terrible yet seems inevitable.


I guess we will see. And yes, war is terrible, but sometimes war is necessary.

[edit on 24-12-2004 by Herman]



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 10:38 PM
link   
Ok, sorry, I've been drinking a little on the typing front. It Christmas...

Fighting for them by trying to impose democracy on a nation that doesn't want it, and 'coincidently' the new powers there let you build oil pipelines? How nice of them!

Lets also remember who put in Saddam thinking we could manipulate him to exploit their country too...

He's not said anything about disliking all Arabs, no, but alot of them have been sent to trial and/or jailed with little or no evidence linking them to terrorist plots at all. One lot were sent to trial but dismissed over a video showing a holiday to disney land. Wtf? Oh, and where is any evidence Iraq was a threat, at all? If that was the REAL reason you guys would have fixed N.Korea, THEY are the threat today. The Arabic nations in general are pretty harmless. Note how the people in Afghanistan and Iraq ain't that much better off now. They're free (Except the parts under terrorist/warlord control), but free and with little left. Some have no homes, no possesions left.

Sometimes war is necessary, was it in Iraq of Afghanistan? Bin Laden is not captured, Iraq is worse off. At least Saddam had no Terrorists terrorising folks, he did that, there was ONE threat. Not many.

The Majority of the western world is going to police state mode now. So yes, Canada too, and over here in the UK.

Bush is much like Regan and the USSR. There ISN'T a global network of terroists at all. Its just a new group has popped up and decided to blow some stuff up. The IRA over here were at it for years. So have many groups. NONE are worldwide organisations, Osamo only started using Al-Queida (SP?) after it was used by Americans. It doesn't exist on a large scale. There is no point invading countries to find it. Its an exuse for other agendas, world power. The Islamic extremists will still be there after they take the WHOLE middle east. They are looking a base which doesn't exist, and then they *might* conclude they'll have to exterminate alot of Arbas to stop it. Like persuciting alot of communists to stop it spreading, like under Regan.

Sad thing is, it's happening in the UK with Blairs mini-america type dream.



posted on Dec, 24 2004 @ 11:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Teh_Gerbil
Ok, sorry, I've been drinking a little on the typing front. It Christmas...


Glad to see you're into the Christmas Sprit
.


Fighting for them by trying to impose democracy on a nation that doesn't want it, and 'coincidently' the new powers there let you build oil pipelines? How nice of them!


I assume that you mean Iraq was better off with Saddam. I'll leave my reply to the other comment you also made implying the same thing.


Lets also remember who put in Saddam thinking we could manipulate him to exploit their country too...


And I'm sure that we wanted him to turn on us? Besides, I never said this administration is perfect. Some of the things they do is based off of greed, which is wrong. I believe that most of what they do is done with good intentions, and will bring good results. Give me some examples of how we exploited their country.


He's not said anything about disliking all Arabs, no, but alot of them have been sent to trial and/or jailed with little or no evidence linking them to terrorist plots at all.


Do you have evidence of this? Not just one example of speculation either.


One lot were sent to trial but dismissed over a video showing a holiday to disney land. Wtf? Oh, and where is any evidence Iraq was a threat, at all?


If that's true, then it's horrible. But I'm sure there's more to the story than you're letting on. Can you provide a link or something telling the full story?


If that was the REAL reason you guys would have fixed N.Korea, THEY are the threat today. The Arabic nations in general are pretty harmless. Note how the people in Afghanistan and Iraq ain't that much better off now.


If we hadn't gone after Iraq, and instead went after North Korea, You people would be saying the same exact thing. We have North Korea under control. What wide scale attacks have they been associated with recently?


They're free (Except the parts under terrorist/warlord control), but free and with little left. Some have no homes, no possesions left.


Well, nobody really had anything when Saddam was in power either. We are still rebuilding. Give it time. Besides, at least their free and random citizens aren't being picked up off the street and getting tortured.


Sometimes war is necessary, was it in Iraq of Afghanistan? Bin Laden is not captured, Iraq is worse off. At least Saddam had no Terrorists terrorising folks, he did that, there was ONE threat. Not many.


Well, off the top of my head let me name some things that we've accomplished.

In Afghanistan: Taliban scattered, elections have been held, the people are free and for the most part, happy.

2/3 of the al qaeda have been captured or killed

75% of the taliban have been captured or killed.

In Iraq: Saddam's regime destroyed. Saddam Captured. Elections are scheduled to be held.

Women in these countries aren't forced to wear those clothes (Not sure what they're called. They covered the face, as well as the whole body), and are able to attend schools and guess what? Vote!

There's more. If you're not too stuck in your ways to look stuff up yourself, suit yourself. The sleeping pill is getting to my head and it's Christmas tomorrow, so I'm done.

Merry Christmas everyone!



posted on Dec, 25 2004 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Well, if you think about it, there haven't been many presidents since Hitler's reign. If you take into account the overt push for national pride and the common enemy, namely Muslims being portrayed to all Americans, I'd say Bush is the most similar. Though, that is not to say he IS similar.



posted on Dec, 25 2004 @ 12:22 PM
link   
I'll give you that one on Women being free now, thats good, but the fact is Afghanistan hasn't changed much really. Their are still people getting kidnapped, and its not that safe. You just can't take Capitalism and Democracy to places that don't want it. I wish someone would realise that.

Iraq went wrong for a couple of reasons. There was no threat, and we didn't plan the aftermath correctly. It did'nt helpo that in the aftermath not laot was done to actually improve anyones life. I feel sorry for the soldiers most off, they take the flak the commanders should get.

The lot for the disneyland tape were in that mass seizeure of pretty much ANYONE who had immigrated to America, luckily for them they were dismissed. We had it over here too; Muslims locked up with little or no proof, but, due to our lack of Guantanamo, even those imprissoned got out soon. Saw it on a TV show, and a google turned up toss, APU. Is there a better search out there?

If the Bush administration had gone to N.Korea on WMD claims, you'd have some to show.
There was also a Nuclear exploison their recently, and they dsid try to invade the south before like Iraq did Kuwait... But N.Korea has a decent Military which could fight. The Iraqi one realised it's hopelessness after Gulf War 1's defeat and fled. All Saddam ever did was fire a few SCUD's, which were lucky if they detonated.

Random citizen's are no longer being tortured, yes, that is a good point. What isn't so good is that they live in fear of a random suicide bomber exploding or a car bomb.

The new equality amoung male/felames is good, yes, you have also done other good things like in Afghanistan you rebuilt alot of public facilities. But, when the War in Iraq started, Afghanistan was'nt finished, and the small number of guy's there couldn't contain the Warlords. Shame, so much wasted potential. Iraq could have waited, it wasn't going to magically rebuild a huge WMD arsenal or buy up lots of Arms. It was too poor and in a bad way anyway. Hell, it was struggling to survive with all the embagoes.

Finish one job before starting another. Might mail that to Rumsfeld if I can. And we shouldn't pull our guys out of Iraq before the whole thing is stable, years though it may take. Bush promised them this, lets see if he can deliver this time.

We are all aware though, that plenty of Iraqi's are going to support the first extremist who runs for election, aren't we?



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 01:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by Teh_Gerbil
I'll give you that one on Women being free now, thats good, but the fact is Afghanistan hasn't changed much really. Their are still people getting kidnapped, and its not that safe. You just can't take Capitalism and Democracy to places that don't want it. I wish someone would realise that.


Sorry for my late reply; it's been a good Christmas
.

First off, you have a good point that you can't force democracy or capitalism onto people that don't want it, but how do you know that these people don't want it? It's not just that, but they needed it. I know that polls are pollls and you can make them say what you want, but I heard about a recent one that had somewhere around 90% of Iraqi's saying that they (this was before the election) wanted Bush to stay in office. The people are certainly better off than they were before. Like I said earlier, the women would still be living in that horrible condition if it weren't for the actions that we took. Even if you don't believe that it's by much, their conditions have improved, and will continue to improve.


Iraq went wrong for a couple of reasons. There was no threat, and we didn't plan the aftermath correctly. It did'nt helpo that in the aftermath not laot was done to actually improve anyones life. I feel sorry for the soldiers most off, they take the flak the commanders should get.


Whether or not there was a big threat is up to speculation. We do know that Saddam was a horrible man. I don't have to reiterate all the terrible things he did in his reign, but it was certainly a good thing we got rid of him. He did support palistinian suicide bombers; we know that. He did hate our country, and supported the terrorists who struck the wtc. Based on the intelligence that Bush had, I don't think anyone could blame him for taking the action that he took. Most people even supported him going in. When they learned of the new intelligence, they turned their backs on him.


If the Bush administration had gone to N.Korea on WMD claims, you'd have some to show.
There was also a Nuclear exploison their recently, and they dsid try to invade the south before like Iraq did Kuwait... But N.Korea has a decent Military which could fight. The Iraqi one realised it's hopelessness after Gulf War 1's defeat and fled. All Saddam ever did was fire a few SCUD's, which were lucky if they detonated.


Well, the N. Korea situation is so sensitive. The whole situation is kinda like a sensitive bomb (Funny metaphor for the situation, huh?), and if we hit it too hard it could explode on us. We're kinda monitoring the situation, and watching to see what we should do.


Random citizen's are no longer being tortured, yes, that is a good point. What isn't so good is that they live in fear of a random suicide bomber exploding or a car bomb.


They always lived in fear of suicide bombers and car bombs.


The new equality amoung male/felames is good, yes, you have also done other good things like in Afghanistan you rebuilt alot of public facilities. But, when the War in Iraq started, Afghanistan was'nt finished, and the small number of guy's there couldn't contain the Warlords. Shame, so much wasted potential. Iraq could have waited, it wasn't going to magically rebuild a huge WMD arsenal or buy up lots of Arms. It was too poor and in a bad way anyway. Hell, it was struggling to survive with all the embagoes.


We still have men in Afghanistan. Maybe we could have waited longer, or put some more men in Afghanistan. That's true, but I still think the actions that we're taking in Iraq are good.

Finish one job before starting another. Might mail that to Rumsfeld if I can. And we shouldn't pull our guys out of Iraq before the whole thing is stable, years though it may take. Bush promised them this, lets see if he can deliver this time.


We are all aware though, that plenty of Iraqi's are going to support the first extremist who runs for election, aren't we?
But at least they won't be appointed in a dictatorship. Besides, I don't think the Iraqi's want another Hussein in office.



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 09:02 AM
link   
I don't want to take this off the discussion at hand but I'm going to submit this for your approval:


Reichsbank President Hjalmar Schacht smugly told the official Nazi newspaper Vlkischer Beobachter that the American leader had adopted the economic philosophy of Hitler and Mussolini. Even Hitler had kind words at first for Roosevelts dynamic leadership, stating that I have sympathy with President Roosevelt because he marches straight to his objective over Congress, over lobbies, over stubborn bureaucracies.


Japanese internment.
Pre-war fuzzy feelings for the economic philosophy of Ben Mussolini.
Grasping hold of the US due to national crisis to greatly change the landscape of the country.
An eventual wartime economy.
Elected four times.


FDR is a better fit....but several US Presidents have done much worse things than Bush has, they just didn't have the benefit of the internet and the 24 hour news cycle for people to jump all over what they did. Do you know that a US President had the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court arrested? I'm doing research for a big thing on US Presidents and what they've done.....so I'm not gonna divulge more.


[edit on (12/28/0404 by PistolPete]



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 03:15 PM
link   
PistolPete,

First off, Love the avatar! Falling Down is a great flick


Any way, about FDR. Ill have to do some checking on that one. I have never heard this about him. I have heard that he was a very strong man, and very set in his ways. When I was about 10, my great grandpa use to talk about him. FDR was my great grandpaw's favorite president. He use to say "Rick, If ever there was a president a man could depend on, it Roosevelt." He had great admeration for FDR. Other than that, and the cleaned up version of US history taught in public schools, I dont have much knowledge of his governmental views.



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 04:03 PM
link   
Ya, Falling Down is one of the best.


Roosevelt formed his economic policy with a group of professors he deemed the "Brain Trust". Long before war broke out in Europe Mussolini was hailed for his "capitalism with government control". Hitler followed this model. The Brain Trust's most radical and eventually influencial member Rexford Tugwell was a follower of this model. To understand how Tugwell thought, this is what he had to say in his 1930 book, American Economic Life:


Mises Institute
Tugwell praised communism as supposedly being "able to produce goods in greater quantities" than capitalism, so as to "spread such prosperity as there is over wider areas of the population." Yes, there may be a certain "ruthlessness, a disregard for liberties and rights," wrote Tugwell, but anyone interested in "peace, prosperity, and progress" must nevertheless imitate "Russia and the Russians."


The central planning style of Mussolini was greatly utilized by the Roosevelt administration and was apparent in programs like the National Industrial Recovery Act and the National Recovery Administration - these programs put the nations industries under strict government control. The NRA was ruled unconstitutional. Like I said I don't want to get into much because I'm researching a thing that will have a great deal of FDR.


[edit on (12/28/0404 by PistolPete]



posted on Dec, 28 2004 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by PistolPete
Like I said I don't want to get into much because I'm researching a thing that will have a great deal of FDR.


[edit on (12/28/0404 by PistolPete]


YA BIG TEASE!
Send me a u2u when you post your research. Id love to read it.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join