Comparing Bush to Hitler ?

[tradeunionsupporter]

I hear from this from both some Liberals and Conservatives that they can admire or respect the American President and yet disagree with the Wars that these Presidents start is this normal ? What I mean is that is saying you like President George Bush but you disagree with the Wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is this like saying you like Adolf Hitler for his policy as far as Job Creation for the German People but you disagree with the Holocaust and Germany attacking Poland in 1939 ?

How Bush's grandfather helped Hitler's rise to power

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

[milkmiku]

That idea is silly, you can like something about someone and hate them as well. Hitler also liked German shepherds and was a vegetarian.

Neat red on bush's granpa. What dose it have to do with Little dubya? Both mainstream parties in America are center right anyway.

I admire that Hitler was a vegetarian and loved his dog.
Or I admire what he managed to do despite the odds.

Does that make me a hitlerite? Nope.

I did not like bush, but he seemed like the kinda of guy you could kick back and have a beer with.

[Arlekino]

That idea is silly, you can like something about someone and hate them as well. Hitler also liked German shepherds and was a vegetarian.

Neat red on bush's granpa. What dose it have to do with Little dubya? Both mainstream parties in America are center right anyway.

I admire that Hitler was a vegetarian and loved his dog.
Or I admire what he managed to do despite the odds.

Does that make me a hitlerite? Nope.

I did not like bush, but he seemed like the kinda of guy you could kick back and have a beer with.
Why are you here?

[Ostrinski]

Very irresponsible comparison. Something that isn't uncommon among liberals.

[ВАЛТЕР]

Way too often do I hear an American comparing a politician to Hitler. I find this very insulting, because they often do not understand the horrors Hitler brought down upon the populations of Europe. Comparing a politician to Hitler is disgusting to me. I don't like Bush at all, but comparing him to Hitler is a bit drastic.

[Bostana]

It's doable,
considering the fact that they were both fascists and that 6 million people died who shouldn't of

[Caj]

It's doable,
considering the fact that they were both fascists and that 6 million people died who shouldn't of

Bush was not a fascist.

[Bostana]

Bush was not a fascist.

Not at all

[Renegade Saint]

It's doable,
considering the fact that they were both fascists and that 6 million people died who shouldn't of
Bush, as well as Obama, is a liberal nationalist. Nothing he did is outside the liberal nationalist tradition.

[Caj]

Not at all

. . . Then why did you say he was?

[Railyon]

I think Chomsky pulled something similar once, something like if the standards of the Nuremberg Trials were applied to post-WWII US leaders they'd all be tried and shot or something like that, which is basically the same pattern but without saying HITLER!!! and stuff.

[The Jay]

They both are assholes, but one was a bigger asshole. To answer seriously though, Bush was not a fascist.

[ВАЛТЕР]

It's doable,
considering the fact that they were both fascists and that 6 million people died who shouldn't of

Bush didn't kill six million people, and Hitler killed a lot more than six million.

Also, Bush was not a fascist, his policies were not fascist. Imperialist? Yes. Illegal? Yes. Fascist? No.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I think Chomsky pulled something similar once, something like if the standards of the Nuremberg Trials were applied to post-WWII US leaders they'd all be tried and shot or something like that, which is basically the same pattern but without saying HITLER!!! and stuff.

He was alluring more to the notion of war crimes and punishment than saying politicians were comparable to Hitler.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

I get turned off by anyone who compares someone or something to Hitler or WWII. The purpose of it is to have people's emotions cloud there thinking so you can get them on your side. It's really irresponsible and horrible to use the horrors of the holocaust to further political ends.

[Anarcho-Brocialist]

Bush wasn't tantamount to Hitler in regards to people killed. But as Hitler brought war throughout Europe, Bush brought it throughout the Middle East. Ask the Iraqi and the Afghan people if they were terrorized, they'd both say yes. Torture was utilized by both camps. Bush is a dick and a terrorist, just like Adolf was a terrorist and a dick.

[~Spectre]

The World War II comparisons were brought on by Neo-Con rhetoric about Iraq. Bush and his administration called Saddam Hussein a modern day Hitler, and invoked the specter of nuclear "holocaust".

[gorillafuck]

I admire that Hitler was a vegetarian and loved his dog. Or I admire what he managed to do despite the odds.why on earth would you pick small aspects of Adolf Hitler to declare your admiration for? or say you admire him just for accomplishing something regardless of what it is?


It's doable,
considering the fact that they were both fascists and that 6 million people died who shouldn't ofexcept Bush is not a fascist. and I don't see how you think that their death tolls were equivalent. Hitlers was much higher.


The World War II comparisons were brought on by Neo-Con rhetoric about Iraq. Bush and his administration called Saddam Hussein a modern day Hitler, and invoked the specter of nuclear "holocaust".it is done for a lot of wars. Milosevic was also called a modern day Hitler. Hitlers name is a propaganda tool.

[Ostrinski]

If I had a dollar for every politician that was compared to Hitler I wouldn't be a communist.

[Railyon]

He was alluring more to the notion of war crimes and punishment than saying politicians were comparable to Hitler.

I don't know, comes really fucking close in my book.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

I don't know, comes really fucking close in my book.

No, not really, especially when the Nurmenburg trials were set up by the bourgeois allied powers.

[Railyon]

If you absolutely need to avoid Godwin's law, the Nuremberg Trials will also do.

[~Spectre]

I don't know, comes really fucking close in my book.

I don't see how you can conclude that so lightly. The talk is actually pretty interesting: http://www.chomsky.info/talks/1990----.htm

That said, one should not gravitate too far to the other side in denying the Nazi analogy.

The American assault on Vietnam, to use a single example, certainly merit the comparison.

In addition, various members of the American foreign policy establishment were ready to engage in a full, total-nuclear assault on the Soviet Union, right after WWII ended.

[~Spectre]

If you absolutely need to avoid Godwin's law, the Nuremberg Trials will also do.

So it's bad to hold the United States up to the same standards imposed on others by the United States?

That's interesting.

[Bostana]

Bush didn't kill six million people, and Hitler killed a lot more than six million.

Bush's Iraq war led a total of over 6 million deaths and yes Hitler did kill more then 6 million people. But you get the point

[Railyon]

So it's bad to hold the United States up to the same standards imposed on others by the United States?

That's interesting.

For the record, I was not being serious. (Can't help it when I'm in OI)

[Kitty_Paine]

Bush's Iraq war led a total of over 6 million deaths and yes Hitler did kill more then 6 million people. But you get the point

I'm just curious as to where you're getting your numbers for the Iraq war. I can't find any good information on the death tolls.

[Bostana]

I'm just curious as to where you're getting your numbers for the Iraq war. I can't find any good information on the death tolls.

The total is a little over 6 million.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

[Kitty_Paine]

The total is a little over 6 million.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War

Did you total it up yourself or is it totalled up on the page somewhere? (lol sorry, doing homework, just skimmed it)

And, apologizing early if I insult your intelligence, but you do know that the words death and casualty don't mean the same thing, right?

[Bostana]

Did you total it up yourself or is it totalled up on the page somewhere? (lol sorry, doing homework, just skimmed it)

And, apologizing early if I insult your intelligence, but you do know that the words death and casualty don't mean the same thing, right?

I'm focusing on the death toll for both U.S., Iraqi, and Civilian

Here is a better link:
http://antiwar.com/casualties/

[Doflamingo]

I don't think Bush was a fascist. He was just a reactionary with the intelligence of a broom.

[Kitty_Paine]

I'm focusing on the death toll for both U.S., Iraqi, and Civilian

Here is a better link:
http://antiwar.com/casualties/

I might be missing something (I'm a little distracted) but I'm not getting 6 million in deaths... ?

Anyway, lol... off topic/doesn't matter at the moment

[milkmiku]

Bush's Iraq war led a total of over 6 million deaths and yes Hitler did kill more then 6 million people. But you get the point


And how many of those were gathered up and sent to death camps?

Bush hitler comparison are just as laughable as bush satan comparison.

[Bostana]

And how many of those were gathered up and sent to death camps?

Bush hitler comparison are just as laughable as bush satan comparison.

Maybe not death camps but abusive Concentration camps:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/MCG307A.html

[milkmiku]

Maybe not death camps but abusive Concentration camps:
http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/MCG307A.html


That is terrible, regardless, Bush did not have people he did not like rounded up and killed. He did not tell the soldiers in the field to gather up people to be murdered on an industrial scale. Bush did not seize power through nefarious means, bush is no longer president, White nationalist don't worship bush. Bush had little to nothing to do with the "War on terror" other than signing off on it. That is what the US president dose, sign what the powers that be want him to sign.

You want bush to be Hitler, but Bush was nothing like him. It really is undermining all the atrocities that took place under Hitlers regime when people try to compare people they don't like to Hitler.

[Luís Henrique]

They both are assholes, but one was a bigger asshole.

And they were of different brands of arseholery.

Luís Henrique

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

I admire that Hitler was a vegetarian and loved his dog.
That makes up for mass murder, I guess.

[ParaRevolutionary]

I would never insult Hitler like that. Hitler was a decorated veteran of WWI, fighting in the Battle of the Somme, one of the bloddiest battles in history.

[tachosomoza]

Bush didn't incarcerate and gas Arab Americans, and he never tried to invade Mexico. He was a douche, but the American people wouldn't let him get away with the shit the German people let Hitler get away with. Reactionary, spoiled, not so bright douche, yes. Genocidal maniac, no.

[ParaRevolutionary]

Bush didn't incarcerate and gas Arab Americans, and he never tried to invade Mexico. He was a douche, but the American people wouldn't let him get away with the shit the German people let Hitler get away with. Reactionary, spoiled, not so bright douche, yes. Genocidal maniac, no.

“Naturally the common people don't want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.”- Herman Goering

[tachosomoza]

I've got faith in the people of the United States, especially the proletariat. They wouldn't let Bush open concentration camps or arbitrarily occupy countries because he feels like it. There'd be uprisings.

[roy]

Bush didn't incarcerate and gas Arab Americans, and he never tried to invade Mexico. He was a douche, but the American people wouldn't let him get away with the shit the German people let Hitler get away with. Reactionary, spoiled, not so bright douche, yes. Genocidal maniac, no.

Because Americans are morally superior to Germans or something? Wut?

[tachosomoza]

Because Americans are morally superior to Germans or something? Wut?

Not at all. I just can't see 3 million people being arbitrarily marched off to death or forced labor simply because of their heritage or religion, I'm sorry. Comparing America after 9/11/2001 to Germany after WWI is silly. A fascist, racist dictatorship simply wouldn't be allowed to take power, too many people here simply would not let that happen.

[Franz Fanonipants]

i vote that we gulag anyone who uses the word hitler after the revolution

i fucking hate that apparently 9/10ths of the world's political discourse was formed between 1939 - 1945

[Tim Cornelis]

I might be missing something (I'm a little distracted) but I'm not getting 6 million in deaths... ?

Anyway, lol... off topic/doesn't matter at the moment

You're not missing anything, his math apparently sucks.


I'm focusing on the death toll for both U.S., Iraqi, and Civilian

Here is a better link:
http://antiwar.com/casualties/

You can't just add up all the estimates, you know. And even if you do that you get 2,000,000 tops.

None of the links your provided claim 6 million. The highest estimates are 1,000,000 and these have been refuted thoroughly. To reach the number of 1,000,000 they polled Iraqi families on how many of their relatives had died, but there was no verification of any sorts.

When other academics went through the numbers they found that the number of close family members that were claimed to have been killed was higher than the number of close and extended family members that were claimed had been killed, which is impossible.

Credible estimates range from 100,000 to 200,000. Nor can we attribute all these deaths to the US.

[tachosomoza]

i vote that we gulag anyone who uses the word hitler after the revolution

i fucking hate that apparently 9/10ths of the world's political discourse was formed between 1939 - 1945

Nah, gulags are too humane. Put them in the babylonian boats, brand them, put a rat up their ass to gobble up their digestive tract, bury them up to their necks, flog them, or give them paper cuts in the eyes. That's how you turn folks around. I guarantee you after I get through with them, they won't even THINK about Hitler.

[roy]

Not at all. I just can't see 3 million people being arbitrarily marched off to death or forced labor simply because of their heritage or religion, I'm sorry. Comparing America after 9/11/2001 to Germany after WWI is silly. A fascist, racist dictatorship simply wouldn't be allowed to take power, too many people here simply would not let that happen.

Exactly, which is why I wonder why you phrased your statement in such a way. It's a silly comparison.

[Ocean Seal]

Bush's Iraq war led a total of over 6 million deaths and yes Hitler did kill more then 6 million people. But you get the point
No it didn't. You can't just make numbers up.

[00001]

Bad Hitler comparisons are a dime a dozen

[Luís Henrique]

It's doable,
considering the fact that they were both fascists and that 6 million people died who shouldn't of

Liberals or conservatives downplaying (http://www.revleft.com/vb/genocide-count-t168788/index.html?p=2385063&highlight=genocide#post2385063) Hitler's atrocities to make Stalin seem worse is quite bad, but something to be expected. Now Stalinists downplaying Hitler's atrocities to make Bush Jr. seem worse is just bad news.

Hitler had 5 - 6 million Jews killed for no other reason they were Jews - indeed, as part of a practical plan to exterminate all Jewish population of Europe. He also killed some other 5 - 6 million people for similar "reasons" and with similar methods - mass shootings by Einsatzgruppen and mass gasing in extermination camps - among them 3 million ethnic Poles and a significant number of Roma people, not to talk about homosexuals and handicapped people. So this is already 11 - 12 million deaths of disarmed people that were under the direct responsibility of the German State. Then you have millions of POWs that were treated irresponsibly and died in consequence of that, plus hundreds of thousands of civilians killed in aerial raids by the Luftwaffe or as collateral damage in military operations, plus millions of soldiers of countries he attacked. Not even to talk about people starved or frozen to death, deliberately, such as populations of Central Europe, or due to misplaning, such as German soldiers in the Eastern Front.

By no means Bush's very lethal, very horrible and completely unjustified military adventures can be compared to that. There were no genocidal plans, no intent to erradicate populations, no extermination camps, no deliberate starvation of people. The mistreatement of POWs, while certainly happened (including a whole new, previously unheard of, categoristation of people as "enemy combatants" in order to illegaly deny them the protection of both American or Iraqi civil law and international military law) never reached anything similar to the scale of the mistreatment of Red Army captured soldiers at the hands of Wehrmacht and SS. Indeed, nothing similar to the German SS parallel "army" devoted to genocide was ever even planned under Bush. American oppositionists can and do have their own organisations, newspapers, and meeting points, unlike in Nazi Germany, where KPD, SPD, liberals, and even troublesome conservatives were persecuted, murdered, jailed, interned in concentration and extermination camps.

Trying to equate them, instead of damaging Bush's reputation, what you do is to help "revisionists" in rehabilitating Hitler.

Luís Henrique

[Ocean Seal]

You're not missing anything, his math apparently sucks.
You can't just add up all the estimates, you know. And even if you do that you get 2,000,000 tops.

I've seen the numbers near 1.6 mil between Iraq and Afghanistan (not only civilian though)


The highest estimates are 1,000,000 and these have been refuted thoroughly. To reach the number of 1,000,000 they polled Iraqi families on how many of their relatives had died, but there was no verification of any sorts
Credible estimates range from 100,000 to 200,000. Nor can we attribute all these deaths to the US.
This is not true though. The Bloomberg school at JHU had the number near 700k for Iraq based on more scientific methods several years before the war ended.

[Luís Henrique]

I don't think Bush was a fascist. He was just a reactionary with the intelligence of a broom.

A broom that is able to turn isolationist sentiment into support for two aggression wars is a quite brilliant broom in my reckoning.

Luís Henrique

[HEAD ICE]

fuck what is this 2004

[HEAD ICE]

The problem isn't the factual problems with the historical comparison. The worst problem with the bush = hitler/nazi/fascist is it was a clear attempt to justify supporting John Kerry and the Democrats. John Kerry supported every foreign policy measure and every domestic surveillance measure put forward by Bush (as did the Democratic Party as a whole).

Well....if Bush is HITLER... then John Kerry who I admit sucks can't be that worse in comparison so it is at least understandable to passively support him (pro tip: no its not). A lot of left groups back then and even now play with the "Anybody but Bush" and "Fight the Right" bullshit.

[Luís Henrique]

the bush = hitler/nazi/fascist [...] was a clear attempt to justify supporting John Kerry and the Democrats.

That, too. The typical Stalinist policy of class cooperation.

Luís Henrique

[Rafiq]

I'm so glad early/mid 2000's bullshit postmodernism is over. The only "revolutionaries" back then were petit bourgeois conspiracy theorists and libertarian militias

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

[gorillafuck]

I don't think Bush was a fascist. He was just a reactionary with the intelligence of a broom.saying Bush was unintelligent is just a liberal centrist way of interpreting Bush's incredibly aggressive foreign policy. he had dumb slip ups in public but he wasn't stupid at all.


I've got faith in the people of the United States, especially the proletariat. They wouldn't let Bush open concentration camps or arbitrarily occupy countries because he feels like it. There'd be uprisings.Iraq and Afghanistan were both invaded and occupied during his presidency.

[tachosomoza]

Yeah, I didn't like Iraq, but Afghanistan was completely justified in many people's eyes. A reactionary Muslim state that sheltered a reactionary murderer.

[Franz Fanonipants]

I'm so glad early/mid 2000's bullshit postmodernism is over. The only "revolutionaries" back then were petit bourgeois conspiracy theorists and libertarian militias

Sent from my SPH-D710 using Tapatalk 2

lol cool fake periodization bro

[Franz Fanonipants]

Yeah, I didn't like Iraq, but Afghanistan was completely justified in many people's eyes. A reactionary Muslim state that sheltered a reactionary murderer.

i dare you to tell this shit to khad

[kashkin]

Yeah, I didn't like Iraq, but Afghanistan was completely justified in many people's eyes. A reactionary Muslim state that sheltered a reactionary murderer.

You do realise that the the Taliban offered to give bin Laden up, and the US backed the Northern Alliance, who were simply the Taliban without the religious aspect. There was absolutely nothing progressive about the invasion of Afghnaistan.

[tachosomoza]

I never said it was progressive. I'm saying that it was easier for many to support.

[l'Enfermé]

Yeah, I didn't like Iraq, but Afghanistan was completely justified in many people's eyes. A reactionary Muslim state that sheltered a reactionary murderer.
Yeah except for Afghanistan is still an Islamic State under Sharia Law except for now it's more pro-American.

[NGNM85]

I think it's probably a good idea to abstain from Hitler comparisons, in general. Being the second worst mass-murderer in the history of the human species, by definition, Hitler has few peers. To invoke the Holocaust so casually is sensationalistic, and an insult, both to to the memories of the millions of victims of Nazi atrocities, as well as to the intelligence of all parties, involved in said discussion.

[Luís Henrique]

Being the second worst mass-murderer in the history of the human species, by definition, Hitler has few peers.

Who would be the first?

Hitler was not the only in his kind; he was a fascist, and there have been other fascists, as well as dictators and failed would-be dictators that share many traits of fascism.

It is not improper to compare Hitler to Mussolini or Franco. But then the result would be something like "Mussolini was a fascist, like Hitler, but by far less ambitious or successful", or "Franco was a brutal dictator, but his dictatorship lacked the permanent state of social mobilisation of fascism and was more akin to a conventional military dictatorship".

It is also not improper to compare fascism to other kinds of bourgeois dictatorships, included bourgeois democracy. But comparing isn't the same as reducing them to the same thing. You compare to see the differences as well as the similarities. When you do that to leaders as disparate as Bush and Hitler, you will find a few similarities, and a vast mass of differences.

Luís Henrique

[l'Enfermé]

Who would be the first?

I don't think I know a single person to whose name could be attributed more deaths than to Hitler's...Timur perhaps? Iran didn't even recover, population-wise, from Timur's conquers until the 20th Century. Genghis Khan also.

There's also Stalin and Mao, but although both killed many millions, their bodycount isn't as high as Hitler(say, if you attribute the 27 million deaths in the SU and the Holocaust directly to Hitler, Hitler obviously beats both Mao and Stalin). However, if you consider 58-61 Great Famine in China to be Mao's fault(it was caused by horrible weather conditions, but it's effects were greatly worsened by Mao's policies - the disastrous industrialization, the catastrophic effects on Chinese agriculture that resulted from Mao's adoption of Lysenko's agricultural practices, the inefficient food distribution, etc), then maybe Mao beats Hitler, but I wouldn't attribute more than a quarter of the deaths(so about 10 million)on Mao's/CCP's criminal incompetence.