Worst Person of All Time

[Gandhi>Bush]

I agree that if GANDHI (Happy Now?) was alive, that the middle east would be in better condition and a lot less violence.

A+ for spelling.

Gandhi was a great person (not the greatest) one of the greatest.

Be looking for the other thread because you just brought it!

:2mad:

This means war. Just look at that smiley.

 

[GarzaUK]

They would surrender with a phone call.

The Normandy invasion of Nazi held France I meant.

I'm quite sick and tired of this sterotype that the French are cowards. Especially since they helped you set up your nation.

Under Napoleon they conquered and controlled most of Europe, beat back our British troops as well. If the French were cowardly they would have ceased being a nation centuries ago. And France had guts to stand up to oppose the Iraq war, a war tinted with greed.

It like me saying all Americans are fat stupid slobs! I hate stereotypes of countries.

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
If you are slurring the Capitalist-Conservative-Republicans by attempting to show similarity with the Third Reich, I'll tell you that it was precisely that group who pulled your British chestnuts out of the fire for you. You may recall that the Socialist-Liberal-Democrats, except for FDR, were anxious to keep out of the fray.

Did I say republicans/conservatives are linked to the third reich? No. I simply said Fascism is right-wing nationalism/patriotism gone mad. Explain what it is then if you think otherwise.

Did I strike a tender spot? What I said I think it was is what triggered your response.

Ah the old American "We saved your asses in the are thing."

Quite a few Americans believed that three thousand miles of Atlantic Ocean was a sufficient barrier. However FDR was anxious to join the fight and did all he could to ensure that he wouldn't be disappointed.

Interesting since Hitler gave up his invasion of the UK before the Americans entered the war.

As I understand it, he was hoping the Brits would see the light and give up. Who knows at what point he would change his mind, again, again, again, again.

The thing that most Americans ignore, is that Britain was vital to WW2 and Europe and the world should be grateful we didn't choose peace with Hitler when he offered it to us. We were outnumbered and outfought, but against all the odds we still fought.

Between the fall of France and Pearl Harbor, Except for air raids, there was pretty much a hiatus on the western front, which at that time, was the Channel.

If you take away just one of the big three - UK, USA, USSR, Nazism would have won the war.

Until the US began to supply the massive quantities of arms and materiel, the UK and USSR were in a hopeless position.

I admire the Soviets, the total punishment they took in WW2 was unbelievable - even more punishment that the British. If it wasn't for Communist Russia, all of Europe not just Eastern Europe would have been under tyranny. Stalin was an evil man yes, but at least he was useful to destroy another evil man.

There are many who believe that the absolute defeat of the Reds at that time would have saved the entire world a great deal of misery, much of which still continues nearly twenty years after the collapse of Russia.

As for the UK, well how the hell would the US lauch and invasion of France without us?

If instead of a stiff upper lip, Chamberlain had exhibited a stiff backbone, and smacked down Hitler as he should have, instead of kissing his ass, it is quite likely that the whole mess, if one did erupt, could have been confined to Germany.

If Britain had fallen and the US came into the war, the invasion would have just been an extension of the drive up the Italian peninsula with additional landings from Africa through the Balkans as well as the Côte d'Azur. It is also possible that landings and buildups would have occurred in Scandinavia with eventual invasion of the low countries.

With a little luck, Eisenhower wouldn't have been saddled with Monty.

 

[akyron]

And France had guts to stand up to oppose the Iraq war, a war tinted with greed.
QUOTE]
French connection armed Saddam


Iraq's Mirage F-1 fighter jets were made by France's Dassault Aviation. Its Gazelle attack helicopters were made by Aerospatiale, which became part of a consortium of European defense companies.
"It is well-known that the Iraqis use front companies to try to obtain a number of prohibited items," a senior Bush administration official said before the war, refusing to discuss Iraq's purchase of French warplane and helicopter parts.
The State Department confirmed intelligence indicating the French had given support to Iraq's military.
"U.N. sanctions prohibit the transfer to Iraq of arms and materiel of all types, including military aircraft and spare parts," State Department spokeswoman Jo-Anne Prokopowicz said. "We take illicit transfers to Iraq very seriously and work closely with our allies to prevent Iraq from acquiring sensitive equipment."
Sen. Ted Stevens, Alaska Republican and chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, declared that France's selling of military equipment to Iraq was "international treason" as well as a violation of a U.N. resolution.
"As a pilot and a former war pilot, this disturbs me greatly that the French would allow in any way parts for the Mirage to be exported so the Iraqis could continue to use those planes," Stevens said.
"The French, unfortunately, are becoming less trustworthy than the Russians," said Rep. Curt Weldon, Pennsylvania Republican and vice chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. "It's outrageous they would allow technology to support the jets of Saddam Hussein to be transferred."
The U.S. military was about to go to war with Iraq, and thanks to the French, the Iraqi air force had become more dangerous.



Yeah. I will agree with the greed part of that statement.
france was making money hand over fist and was perturbed when the golden goose Saddam got eaten for dinner..

 

[GarzaUK]

Did I strike a tender spot? What I said I think it was is what triggered your response.

No just saying Nazism was right-wing nationalism gone mad. Do you not agree? Nazism was conservatism to the utmost extreme.

Quite a few Americans believed that three thousand miles of Atlantic Ocean was a sufficient barrier. However FDR was anxious to join the fight and did all he could to ensure that he wouldn't be disappointed.

And thank god he did!

As I understand it, he was hoping the Brits would see the light and give up. Who knows at what point he would change his mind, again, again, again, again.

Actually funnily enough Hitler admired the British Empire and hoped that the two empires would become allies and rule the world together. He said I think "No-one has spread civilisation more correctly that the British Empire." or something like that. But we didn't want to do that.

Between the fall of France and Pearl Harbor, Except for air raids, there was pretty much a hiatus on the western front, which at that time, was the Channel.

Yes, except for the bombings. However the battle of the Atlantic was still being fought. The Battle for North Africa was being fought against the Germans and Italians. Also we were fighting the Japanese in Asia. We were busy boys. We invaded Greece to help out their fight against Italy, forcing Hitler to invade, putting back his "Barbarossa" by two vital weeks.

Until the US began to supply the massive quantities of arms and materiel, the UK and USSR were in a hopeless position.

Like I said take one of the big three and the war was lost.

There are many who believe that the absolute defeat of the Reds at that time would have saved the entire world a great deal of misery, much of which still continues nearly twenty years after the collapse of Russia.

The defeat of the USSR would results in the transfer of all Nazi troops in the Eastern front to the Western front. Nightmare. On the western front the British/ American/ Canadians fought only approx one third of the Nazi army.

If instead of a stiff upper lip, Chamberlain had exhibited a stiff backbone, and smacked down Hitler as he should have, instead of kissing his ass, it is quite likely that the whole mess, if one did erupt, could have been confined to Germany.

True. Hindsight is a great thing isn't it. The carnage of World War 1 played on everyone's minds during this time. America would have done exactly the same thing.

If Britain had fallen and the US came into the war, the invasion would have just been an extension of the drive up the Italian peninsula with additional landings from Africa through the Balkans as well as the Côte d'Azur. It is also possible that landings and buildups would have occurred in Scandinavia with eventual invasion of the low countries.

With a little luck, Eisenhower wouldn't have been saddled with Monty.

Tell me how on earth can you launch and invasion against a military superpower at the time (no soft Iraq or Afganistan) thousands of miles away from your homeland and u-boats roaming about.
It would take months for supplies to get across from continent to continent to the front. Plus you had no air cover, since you have no bases in the area, most of you carriers was in the Pacific. Italy even with British help was no piece of cake. In North Africa, Monty beat back the Nazi's greatest general - Rommel, but no British would mean you would have to invade North Africa with no help.
If you are telling me the US could have launched an invasion of Europe without the UK, you are crazy.
It wouldn't be possible to launch any invasion.

 

[Mixed View]

GarzaUK is the worst person of all time! vawwhahahahahah! lol just kidding. The absolute worst person of all time is the Lord of the Sith (Darth Vadar) A man the almost destroyed all of the entirety of goodness, and probably killed more than a billion. the greatest jedi, but worst person of all time.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

GarzaUK is the worst person of all time! vawwhahahahahah! lol just kidding. The absolute worst person of all time is the Lord of the Sith (Darth Vadar) A man the almost destroyed all of the entirety of goodness, and probably killed more than a billion. the greatest jedi, but worst person of all time.

You are a sad little man.

On that note, I'm going to parae through my neighbor hood chanting, "May 19th! May 19th! The Empire will rise!..."

 

[Fantasea]

Originally Posted by Fantasea
Did I strike a tender spot? What I said I think it was is what triggered your response.

No just saying Nazism was right-wing nationalism gone mad. Do you not agree? Nazism was conservatism to the utmost extreme.

Nazism was nothing more than a beaten nation groveling in poverty which fell under the spell of a lunatic whose promises led the country from bad to worse.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
Quite a few Americans believed that three thousand miles of Atlantic Ocean was a sufficient barrier. However FDR was anxious to join the fight and did all he could to ensure that he wouldn't be disappointed.

And thank god he did!

That's all that kept Hitler's forces at bay prior to 1942.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
As I understand it, he was hoping the Brits would see the light and give up. Who knows at what point he would change his mind, again, again, again, again.

Actually funnily enough Hitler admired the British Empire and hoped that the two empires would become allies and rule the world together. He said I think "No-one has spread civilisation more correctly that the British Empire." or something like that. But we didn't want to do that.

He seemed to remember that the family name Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was changed to Windsor and looked forward to eventually reuniting all of the Aryans; the British ones, too.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
Between the fall of France and Pearl Harbor, Except for air raids, there was pretty much a hiatus on the western front, which at that time, was the Channel.

Yes, except for the bombings. However the battle of the Atlantic was still being fought. The Battle for North Africa was being fought against the Germans and Italians. Also we were fighting the Japanese in Asia. We were busy boys. We invaded Greece to help out their fight against Italy, forcing Hitler to invade, putting back his "Barbarossa" by two vital weeks.

You were able to this only because of the Lend-Lease Program, a tongue in cheek title if there ever was one, which provided you with all of the war materiel you needed. You may recall Sir Winston's exhortation, "Give us the tools and we'll finish the job." It was, of course, the US taxpayer who gave them to him.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
Until the US began to supply the massive quantities of arms and materiel, the UK and USSR were in a hopeless position.

Like I said take one of the big three and the war was lost.

A correct statement would be on the order of, "If the US doesn't come in to save us, the war is lost." The US came in, Britain and Russia were saved.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
There are many who believe that the absolute defeat of the Reds at that time would have saved the entire world a great deal of misery, much of which still continues nearly twenty years after the collapse of Russia.

The defeat of the USSR would results in the transfer of all Nazi troops in the Eastern front to the Western front. Nightmare. On the western front the British/ American/ Canadians fought only approx one third of the Nazi army.

Hitler's pride, vanity, and stupidity in attacking three months before the start of the infamous and brutal Russian Winter with the belief that it would be all over in that short time, enabled the Russians to simply fall back and stretch the German supply lines until the first freeze set in which shut down everything. At that point the push toward Berlin commenced and never stopped.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
If instead of a stiff upper lip, Chamberlain had exhibited a stiff backbone, and smacked down Hitler as he should have, instead of kissing his ass, it is quite likely that the whole mess, if one did erupt, could have been confined to Germany.

True. Hindsight is a great thing isn't it. The carnage of World War 1 played on everyone's minds during this time. America would have done exactly the same thing.

Is that what your crystal ball is telling you? My crystal ball tells me that appeasing a dictator is much the same as paying a blackmailer. Neither stop asking for more.

Originally Posted by Fantasea
If Britain had fallen and the US came into the war, the invasion would have just been an extension of the drive up the Italian peninsula with additional landings from Africa through the Balkans as well as the Côte d'Azur. It is also possible that landings and buildups would have occurred in Scandinavia with eventual invasion of the low countries.

With a little luck, Eisenhower wouldn't have been saddled with Monty.

Tell me how on earth can you launch and invasion against a military superpower at the time (no soft Iraq or Afganistan) thousands of miles away from your homeland and u-boats roaming about.
It would take months for supplies to get across from continent to continent to the front. Plus you had no air cover, since you have no bases in the area, most of you carriers was in the Pacific. Italy even with British help was no piece of cake. In North Africa, Monty beat back the Nazi's greatest general - Rommel, but no British would mean you would have to invade North Africa with no help.
If you are telling me the US could have launched an invasion of Europe without the UK, you are crazy.
It wouldn't be possible to launch any invasion.

Let's look at it this way.

Once the US got cranked up, it was able to fight a two front war. Had Europe fallen, the US effort could have been concentrated on Japan, finishing them off much sooner. In the meantime, with the new weapons coming on line, B29s, nuclear stuff, the entire Pacific fleet, etc., etc., moving into some of the undeveloped countries in Africa and creating bases there would have set the stage for the big rescue.

On the other hand, perhaps the US might have maintained a policy of isolation, in which case you would have had the European Union back in 1943.

 

[ender929]

Mao, he was as brutal and murderous as Stalin and Hitler and he was in power much longer.

 

[Binary_Digit]

I voted Stalin, because he actively pursued the deaths of more people than Hitler and Mao Zedong combined.

Gandhi was the greatest man. He isn't called "man of the mellinnium" for nothing.

 

[teacher]

Hitler is by far the worst. He was a mass-murdering rascist, homophobic, anti-semetic, fascist who slaughtered all he opposed. Stalin is a close second though. Even though I am a communist I absolutely despise Stalin for his crimes against the Bolshiviks and the working class. The third worse would have to be the bourgeoisie dictator George W Bu$h. We will be paying with blood for his mistakes for many, many, years to come. Hitler, Stalin, Bu$h in that order.

What makes Bush so much worse than his dad, Reagan, or any other republican?

 

[Soviet_Guy]

I voted Kim Jong II, because I know some North Koreans, and I've watched qiet a bit about life in North Korea from British news, so realiable information, and of the things I've heard.

Hitler, he was just a man a little short on a normal mind, it was just a dark time for Germans and that's how he got the power, so you know what, would you sentence a crazy man to death? No, so he's not THAT evil, just mentally deranged.

Stalin, well, he was the worst Soviet Leader of all time, but, I'm Russian, and I can't vote for him, and plus, he was paranoid, so crazy as Hitler, not THAT evil all by himself.

Fidel Castro, I love this man, he always has a cigar in his mouth and always insults the United States, all the problems of the country he blames on the U.S., that's hilarious

Everyone else, they either didn't have a big enough impact: Saddam, Bin Laden ext

 

[walrus]

What makes Bush so much worse than his dad, Reagan, or any other republican?

And I bet you consider yourself a tolerant, open-minded, compassionate, embracing progressive don't you? Ain't irony fun?

There are so many candidates for worst it is hard to rank. Hitler, Stalin, Mao are all obvious contenders. Various other dictators have been every bit as evil, but the smaller scale of their power has brought them to less infamy (Pol Pot, "Papa Doc", Milosevic). However, most of this people believed in some twisted section of their heart that what they were doing was right for their people. More evil to me are those who commit evil for the sake of evil - serial killers, serial rapists, etc... Although their evil affects less people, there is no redeeming motive behind it.

Soviet Guy, please don't put ideas into my mouth. I personally have no problem executing "crazy" people. If you are crazy enough to commit mass crimes against humanity you are undoubtably too sick to ever be cured. It would be truly unjust to hold someone in prison (or an institution) for life when there is no hope of cure - better just to end their misery.

 

[Soviet_Guy]

They don't know what they're doing.

 

[ENS]

Why wasn't Dubya included ? I'm sure he would have received a few votes.

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

I agree, that is why that I put a other, I feel that Mao ZeDong was terrible, but then again.. some people actually liked him.

Yeah...& we actually have people in this country who like Fidel Castro too...but you included him...Same goes for "Uncle" Josef Stalin...heck, we've even got people who think Saddam wasn't all that bad.

I suppose all of us could agree on Hitler. Not so sure he's the worst but at this early hour just coming off a third shift that's my answer & I'm sticking to it.

 

[farleft]

Castro and Chavez are good people doing a good job for the people of their country.
Mao was a good guy too.

 

[Hoot]

I suppose for sheer numbers, you have to give the nod to Hitler. I believe he had some 3 million Jews murdered in concentration camps?

Give Bush a few more terms as president and maybe he can catch up?

Over 100,000 civilians killed in Iraq...over 1600 of our own dead.

I can hear the screaming of the right wing zealots now, but the reason I mention Bush is because we don't know the full long range implications of what this man has done to our country.

He lied to take our nation to war, and has left a debt that could very well spell the end of the United States as we know it. It will take untold generations to pay off the debt this man has created.

Will our dollar collapse? Will the stock market crash? Will all the foreigners who own our U.S. stocks pull their money out because they fear the collapse of our economy?

Are we more hated by the rest of the world then before Bush took office?

That's a no-brainer, isn't it?

Even a few of his fellow republicans are describing Bush as a stubborn man...It's the "I'm right, you're wrong," mentality and complete refusal to compromise that is so scary.

That's why those 14 Senators...who recently comprimised on the judicial/fillibuster nonsense...I think those 7 Republican Senators should have statues erected in their honor.

 

[Soviet_Guy]

I suppose for sheer numbers, you have to give the nod to Hitler. I believe he had some 3 million Jews murdered in concentration camps?

I'm so tired of Jews being mentioned when some one says Hitler, oh cry me a river, 3 mill, there were 22 million Russians killed! Does anyone take the time to remember them!

Over 100,000 civilians killed in Iraq...over 1600 of our own dead.

Yes, the number of Iraqs killed is enormous against the pathetic 1600 U.S. killed, just tells you how poorly out wayed the U.S. put the people of Iraq, shame on Bush!

Will our dollar collapse? Will the stock market crash? Will all the foreigners who own our U.S. stocks pull their money out because they fear the collapse of our economy?

Yes, many economists believe it will occur in 10-20 years, as the U.S. debt rises to 10 trill, the walls will collapse due to payout agreements the United States made with Germany, China, Britain, Japan and other big nations of whom they own money to.

Are we more hated by the rest of the world then before Bush took office?

No, not really, the United states has been the most hated country in the world since the late 60s and all the info on how badly U.S. soldiers treated POWs, you know, cutting arms and legs for entertainment, that's right, Americans can be cold blooded murderers when they are trained like dogs, anyone see Full Metal Jacket? That's very true indeed.

 

[ludahai]

I Over 100,000 civilians killed in Iraq...over 1600 of our own dead.

.

Once again, the Lancet number is cited. When will you liberals learn that you can't expect people who actually READ to believe those numbers, even if you tout them again and again and again.....

 

[ENS]

Have you been in the Sun too long ? How many American soldiers do you think the DOD says HAVE been killed and since we are talking about credibility why would anyone believe this Administration. WMD's that was a lie. Eminent threat was another lie. I won't spend all of the Clinton surplus another lie. We will take care of our Veterans ,another lie. The deficit will be small and short term ,another lie .I'm a Uniter not a divider and the lies go on and on .Why don't you tell us what Bush hasn't lied about. Pull your head out of the dark ,turn off the pill popper on talk radio and block FOX news and you might even be able to discuss issues intelligently.

 

[Arthur Fonzarelli]

Have you been in the Sun too long ? How many American soldiers do you think the DOD says HAVE been killed and since we are talking about credibility why would anyone believe this Administration. WMD's that was a lie. Eminent threat was another lie. I won't spend all of the Clinton surplus another lie. We will take care of our Veterans ,another lie. The deficit will be small and short term ,another lie .I'm a Uniter not a divider and the lies go on and on .Why don't you tell us what Bush hasn't lied about. Pull your head out of the dark ,turn off the pill popper on talk radio and block FOX news and you might even be able to discuss issues intelligently.

They did find some remnants of WMDs. I listed them in another thread. "Eminent threat" was first used by Senator Kennedy; but was attributed to Bush because he did adopt the phrase later. As for the Clinton surplus...well that's a lie in itself.

Table of National Debt for years 1993 - 2000


09/30/2000 - $5,674,178,209,886.86
09/30/1999 - $5,656,270,901,615.43
09/30/1998 - $5,526,193,008,897.62
09/30/1997 - $5,413,146,011,397.34
09/30/1996 - $5,224,810,939,135.73
09/29/1995 - $4,973,982,900,709.39
09/30/1994 - $4,692,749,910,013.32
09/30/1993 - $4,411,488,883,139.38

http://www.publicdebt.treas.gov/opd/opdhisto4.htm

 

[ENS]

They did find some remnants of WMDs

The 20 year old empty warheads are NOT WMD's. The Botox in the refrigerator of a plastic surgeon are NOT bio-weapons and The WHOLE World knows it. Why don't you post the Federal budget deficit figures from 92 to 05. NOT the National Debt figures. Clinton knew how to balance a Budget. Bush doesn't know what a budget is. Don't you know the difference between National Debt and the annual Federal Budget deficit.

 

[Roundhouse!]

I suppose all of us could agree on Hitler.

Hitler was a genius. A despicable human but a genious.

This does not drive my opinion either direction as I can't quote the statistic but I've read on more than one occasion that with the amount of people missing after the war, there was no way possible that hitler's nazis could have exterminated as many people (6 million?) as is claimed.

Again, this is not my opinion, just an attempt to inject a different possibility into the mix.

Though I have to wonder...How is Pol Pot not included in the list?
He is my choice...he did nothing good only bad. At least you can't say that about all of the people on this list.

 

[akyron]

I think those 7 Republican Senators should have statues erected in their honor.

Which is exactly why they "compromised".

Immediately after the "compromise" Dem's filibustered Bolton and Brown anyway.


There was no spirit of compromise here. Just the same obstructionism..

Janice Rogers Brown Nomination Headed for Final Vote

(CNSNews.com) - By a vote of 65 to 32, Senate Republicans ended the filibuster of judicial nominee Janice Rogers Brown Tuesday, and a final vote on her nomination to the U.S. Appeals Court for the District of Columbia is expected to be held Wednesday. If confirmed, Brown would be the second African American woman to sit on that appeals court. "We now have the opportunity to have an up-or-down vote on an extremely talented and qualified judge," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) in a statement. "President Bush chose wisely when he nominated Judge Brown for this important position. Her presence on the federal bench will advance the cause of conservative judicial philosophy. She will be an ideal conservative judge who follows the law and does not legislate from the bench," added Graham. "I'm very disappointed she has been treated so poorly for nearly two years, but I'm also glad to know that tomorrow she will finally get the vote she has long deserved," he said.

Democrats held up Bolton's nomination last week in a dispute over documents they claim the White House has refused to provide. Congress is not in session this week, meaning any new vote on the long-delayed nomination is at least a week off.


All that is missing is for the 7 dems to say "suckers" if they have not already