Hitler Good Or Bad? Whats your opinion?

[Ambassadar]

Was Hitler a good leader for Germany? Just compare the Germany when he took over to Germany when his reign of power ended.

 

 

 

When he took over...

 

Germany was hurting very bad economically.

 

 

 

When he left power...

 

Germany was hurting very bad economically

 

 

 

AND

 

 

 

Germany was a pile of rubble from years of bombing, it's factories were destroyed, half of the country was in control of Stalin and remained that way for the next 50 years. The other half was in control of GB and the US. Millions of Germans were dead in a war that was lost and as icing on the cake Hitler chickened out and killed himself rather than face the consequence of his own actions.

 

 

 

Yeah... he was a great leader... :roll:

 

 

 

He had a few years in the early/mid thirties where he helped German interests but he squandered those gains pretty quickly.

[adam_ross0]

I have to go with both. As a dictator of Germany, he led them out of a depression, advanced technology, made them a powerful nation, gave them a strong military, and supplied jobs. That, he did, was good. But, doing this, he killed millions of people, went through the holocaust, nearly wiped out an entire race/religion, and above all, took away the things in other countries that he gave to germany.

 

 

 

Overall, he was a very bad ruler. But he did lead Germany out of a miserable time. But, like the guy above me said, even though it was successful DURING the war..he left Germany in a terrible economic state..and had contributed to the beginning of the cold war..which divided the country, mind you.

[hohto]

as icing on the cake Hitler chickened out and killed himself rather than face the consequence of his own actions.

 

 

 

 

Suicide was probably the best thing in that case. If he had been caught by the allies, his death would most likely been cruel an humiliating plus if he had stood tall in the "trial", he would now be a martyr. Many a lot lower ranked NSDAP members got senteced to death or really long jail senteces, what would have been done to him?

 

 

 

The winners write history and judge the ones who lost. In my eyes the ones who dropped nukes and ordered them to be dropped to Hiroshima and Nagasaki wer a lot bigger criminals than Julius Streicher for example. Streicher got sentenced to death, the other ones are now war heroes. If you don't know who's Streicher, here's a link:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Streicher

[Defender2516]

Some of you guys say hitler was great because he built roads/air way ect.

 

 

 

However look at it this way, he already knew what he was going to plan when he came into power, so had he been a good person, he would have shrugged off roads and airways, never even thought of them, thus they would have never existed.

 

 

 

~Defender~

[hohto]

However look at it this way, he already knew what he was going to plan when he came into power, so had he been a good person, he would have shrugged off roads and airways, never even thought of them, thus they would have never existed.

 

 

 

That was one way to employ people, however. Without that Germany would have suffered from sick hyperinflation, he at least gave some job. Second, should current countries stop their researches on certain things and take down their armies? After all they are there for one certain thing: war.

[Icingdeath]

That would be nice to have a global disarmament. Like in the Left Behind series, all the countries get rid of their armies but transfer 10% of their armed forces to the United Nations for peacekeeping.

[warri0r45]

If you take out the racial hygene, the propoganda and the war in which he was undoubtedly agressive rather than passive in starting you could almost say his bringing germany out of depression and going on a blitzkrieg (pun intended) of industrial and infrastructure reform was a good thing, if they weren't motivated by military expansion. I doubt his motives were pure going on how he annexed some surrounding lands and how much of the economic expansion was focussed on improving the military.

[Bubsa]

as icing on the cake Hitler chickened out and killed himself rather than face the consequence of his own actions.

 

 

 

 

Suicide was probably the best thing in that case. If he had been caught by the allies, his death would most likely been cruel an humiliating plus if he had stood tall in the "trial", he would now be a martyr.

 

 

 

Saddam Hussein, anyone?

[hohto]

Saddam Hussein, anyone?

 

 

 

More like Saddam*10. Just compare Saddam's trial to what happened in NÃÆÃâÃâürnberg.

[Zonorhc]

However look at it this way, he already knew what he was going to plan when he came into power, so had he been a good person, he would have shrugged off roads and airways, never even thought of them, thus they would have never existed.

 

 

 

Can you provide a source, instead of, you know, making a baseless non-argument like that?

 

 

 

As for Hitler, I must admit that he did an excellent job of getting Germany behind him. Quite apart from his crowd-winning speeches, such as at Nuremberg, he managed to bring to him people who could do that without Hitler having to be present all the time: Leni Riefenstahl and Joseph Goebbels. Without those two practically running his propaganda machine, there was no way that Hitler would have held onto such a large popular base. They were, in the words of David Christian, vital parts of that coercive machinery which is essential to power.

 

 

 

He did provide jobs and prompted technological development, and kept people's minds off the depression. He rid Germany of the Weimar Republic that was digging it further into the terms of Versailles - which, by the way, was a ridiculous exercise by the Allies in giving Germany another pretext for war to begin with - and, for the large part, made life better for the German people.

 

 

 

The war was, of course, a stupid idea, but it doesn't make Hitler any less of a brilliant leader. Terrible person, to be sure, but that doesn't mean you can just stick your fingers in your ears and yell "LA LA LA CAN'T HEAR YOU, DO NOT WANT!" every time someone so much as points out any of the man's good traits. This is like piling on the negative criticism on the war in Iraq, while ignoring all the good that the troops there are actually doing. Sure, it's largely bad, but you can't ignore that there are good things coming out of it, however small in comparison.

[Abyssalwhip]

Anyone who tries to defend hitler should really log off the computer, call your local shrink and sign up for a few years worth of treatment.

+1

[The_Dragon_Reborn]

I can't consider someone who was solely responsible for the death of 6 million people good, no matter what he did for his country.

[Kilo]

Anyone who tries to defend hitler should really log off the computer, call your local shrink and sign up for a few years worth of treatment.

 

 

 

Nuff said.

 

 

 

He killed so many frigging people why are we discussing this?

[warri0r45]

Anyone who tries to defend hitler should really log off the computer, call your local shrink and sign up for a few years worth of treatment.

 

 

 

Nuff said.

 

 

 

He killed so many frigging people why are we discussing this?

 

 

 

Because some of us recognise that the axiom of this discussion is that the guy was a total tosser.

[Kilo]

Anyone who tries to defend hitler should really log off the computer, call your local shrink and sign up for a few years worth of treatment.

 

 

 

Nuff said.

 

 

 

He killed so many frigging people why are we discussing this?

 

 

 

Because some of us recognise that the axiom of this discussion is that the guy was a total tosser.

 

 

 

Explain that to me because when I looked up the slang tosser, it came up with some interesting results :shame: and if my definition of the word tosser is correct it seems you agree with me.

[adam_ross0]

Overall, I think he's one of the worst pieces of *radioedit* to walk on the face of this earth..but we're talking aside the war, here. Other than the holocaust, he did provide for his country..even if it had a terrible motivation and ended up causing World War II.

[warri0r45]

Anyone who tries to defend hitler should really log off the computer, call your local shrink and sign up for a few years worth of treatment.

 

 

 

Nuff said.

 

 

 

He killed so many frigging people why are we discussing this?

 

 

 

Because some of us recognise that the axiom of this discussion is that the guy was a total tosser.

 

 

 

Explain that to me because when I looked up the slang tosser, it came up with some interesting results :shame: and if my definition of the word tosser is correct it seems you agree with me.

 

 

 

By tosser I mean bad person. And yes, I do agree that he is a tosser but I don't agree that we shouldn't be discussing this.

[Zonorhc]

Nuff said.

 

 

 

He killed so many frigging people why are we discussing this?

 

Because the original question wasn't asking whether he was a top bloke or not?

[shadow_00083]

To be honest I think Hitler was horrible.

 

 

 

People say he was a good leader, I have no idea how you can see that.

 

One of the first things he did as Chancellor of Germany was ban all other political parties besides the Nazi party. He also killed political enemies who were trying to overthrow him.

 

 

 

I found this on Wikipedia:

 

 

 

"President Paul von Hindenburg died on August 2, 1934. Rather than holding new presidential elections, Hitler's cabinet passed a law proclaiming the presidency dormant and transferred the role and powers of the head of state to Hitler as FÃÆÃâÃâührer und Reichskanzler (leader and chancellor).[30] Thereby Hitler also became supreme commander of the military, whose officers then swore an oath not to the state or the constitution but to Hitler personally.[30] In a mid-August plebiscite, these acts found the approval of 84.6%[31] of the electorate. Combining the highest offices in state, military and party in his hand, Hitler had attained supreme rule that could no longer be legally challenged."

 

 

 

Now I don't think someone banning all Legal ways of trying to become President of Germany is a good leader.

 

 

 

And burning the Reichstag building, where the German Parliament meets doesn't sound like to good of a leader does he?

 

 

 

Even though it wasn't really proven that he did it, who else would want to burn the building?

 

 

 

Hitler was a horrible leader if you really look at it

[The Dark Lord]

He would have probably been an extremely good leader if it weren't for his ambition to conquer the globe and his master race stuff.

 

 

 

He killed what? Millions of Jews just for what they were? He even did it in a cruel way and destroyed families and even separated them from each other just to die in death camps.

[Chocobodude0]

Hitler was awesome if you were blonde with blue eyes. Otherwise, nope.

 

 

 

Though he may have done a few good things, he ended up leaving Germany in an even worse state than it was befroe he came to power. He had a large hand in creating the biggest war of all time (I believe WWII had the largest total death count from any war? Correct me if I'm wrong, I am not totally sure that I'm correct), and created a mass genocide of Jews, Gypsies, Homosexuals, etc.

 

 

 

He was a great speaker. However, when he talked, he ended up not being able to back that talk up.

[How2PK]

I think I am going for bad on this one. Close call though...

[miss18]

In my eyes he was one of the best speakers ever, but as a war leader he wasn't too great.

 

 

 

He wasn't a great war leader, in my eyes he was much better than Chamberlain. He beat Poland in 2 weeks he beat France in 6 weeks. The only downside is he was fighting too many fronts at once. But he did come up with a strategic plan called Blitzkreig which helped to defeat Finland, Poland, Denmark and France but the only downside is he thought two greater countries (Britain and Russia) They both had massive man power and quick ablity to form in arms. But Germany wasn't prepared for the size of Russia nor where they prepared for the winters their. And for Britain Germany weren't prepared for the English Channel nor for our Air Force.

 

 

 

Alltogether Hitler was a good War leader expect for the end of the war.

 

 

 

Miss

[megakiller32]

In my eyes he was one of the best speakers ever, but as a war leader he wasn't too great.

 

 

 

He wasn't a great war leader, in my eyes he was much better than Chamberlain. He beat Poland in 2 weeks he beat France in 6 weeks. The only downside is he was fighting too many fronts at once. But he did come up with a strategic plan called Blitzkreig which helped to defeat Finland, Poland, Denmark and France but the only downside is he thought two greater countries (Britain and Russia) They both had massive man power and quick ablity to form in arms. But Germany wasn't prepared for the size of Russia nor where they prepared for the winters their. And for Britain Germany weren't prepared for the English Channel nor for our Air Force.

 

 

 

Alltogether Hitler was a good War leader expect for the end of the war.

 

 

 

Miss

All these pro nazi things your saying, it sounds like you actually support him... :x

 

 

 

My opinion is Bad, Because im sure any other political leader would be able to sort out the unemployed too...

 

Also, the "factories" he built were concentration camps.

[Ginger_Warrior]

This question is about whether Hitler was a good leader, not a good person. There's a difference. Also, when people talk about the Holocaust with Hitler, they're mistaken. It was other Nazi leaders such as Himmler (leader of the SS) and Goering (head of the Office of the Four-Year Plan) which radicalised the party and came up with the 'Final Solution'. This wasn't Hitler's doing - in fact Hitler was quite uneasy with this policy at first, but saw no other option after their invasion of the USSR.

 

 

 

Now, on to the question. In my opinion, Hitler was at times a brilliant leader, but at other times the most hopeless one that will ever walk this Earth. You're right - he did recover Germany after they were hit badly because of the Wall Street crash (they'd borrowed a loan from the US, which the US recalled during the Depression), using the Autobahns and extending public works. However, does Hitler deserve all the credit for this? Well, it wouldn't have been possible without Schacht's bartering with the Balkan states or his Mefo Bills, so while Hitler had a very effective agenda, it wasn't him which made it work. As for restoring Germany to fighting fitness... well I'd have to say he only half did this. The introduction of the Hitler Youth, the conscription polices and the Four Year Plan all helped to get Germany ready. Indeed, had war not been declared in 1939, Germany's economy would have continued to grow, and the war would have been even tougher than it was for the Allies. But the fact remains that by 1939, Germany wasn't ready for war. Hitler also made the call to attack Poland with the USSR, so he could be called stupid for this. He was also winning the war when he decided rather stupidly to attack the Soviet Union. Therefore, Hitler at the beginning made some absolutely genius decisions which turned Germany from a ruined, broken country into a world power, but by the end of the war, as he becaome more radicalised it's clear his decision actually led to the downfall of Germany.

 

 

 

I'd also like to point out Hitler never really 'led' his party. The Nazi party was strangely organised, as pointed out in many books. It was almost like Hitler created the impression of what he wanted, and other went out to acheive that vision. Therefore, I think a more pertinant quesiton would be, "Did Hitler lead his Party?", rather than, "Did he lead it well?".