Hitler(Germany) Hussein(Iraq)

After the Wilhelm II's Germany was defeated in the WW1 in 1918, Germany was given approximately 12-14 years to re-build its weapons of mass destruction. Hitler then entered power, going from Chancellor to The Fuehrer after the death of Hindenburg. The rest is history.
After Iraq was defeated in GW1 (Gulf War 1), Iraq was given approximately 10-12 years to re-build its weapons of mass destruction.
Hussein entered power in the 1970's, he's has been around much longer than Hitler was.
Lets not repeat History and let this tyrant loose again. Lets finish this off once and for all.
No doubt that North Korea must be next. They must be disarmed.

Agreed!

Hitler(Gemany) Saddam(Iraq) Bush(USA)

Yep, get all the dictators!

There are a lot of similarities, aren�t there? Hitler killed Jews � Saddam killed Kurds, etc, etc. I guess some will argue that Saddam is weaker, compared to Hitler. BUT � that�s why we should get him NOW rather than wait �till later � or didn�t we learn anything from the world wars?

As far as NK: NK is another reason for removing Saddam now - do we want Iraq to be another NK (as far as nukes) I just don't think the world needs Iraq to cross the nuclear rubicon. He'd eat up the ME and take out Israel, and probably some other countries, when it came to the point of absolutely having to remove him. Shame on the UN for letting him get this far.

Yes Bob, you could argue Saddam is weaker than Hitler, but thanks to technology it seems his weapons are a bit more threatening. I dont like the thought of biological weapons. I totally agree we need to take him out sooner rather than later. The longer we wait, the more time he has to prepare and continue making weapons, and I believe he is. saddam

it�s amazing how ppl follows mass to think about something, i bid 30 min before 11 s , no one knew the name of bin laden or where was afghanistan!!!!
The suposed �terrorism�has been in the history already for at least 100 years (yes there were terrorist in monarchy times in medieval ages) and they didn�t need any bomb or planes to crush into something, being terrorist is a concept much more deep, is fight for rights that no one fights for, When bush said
Or u are democratic
or u are terrorist
is saying to ppl that will fight against what he has behind, or u surrender or u will die......

I think it�s to time to see that saddam is just a person to get blamed, some satelitte faked documents, some explosions, some news in the same channels and newspapers, and becomes a fact in society, is that simple, u should start to question how deep is this matter....

Originally posted by CoLD aNGeR
it�s amazing how ppl follows mass to think about something, i bid 30 min before 11 s , no one knew the name of bin laden or where was afghanistan!!!!

Oh really? What about the US embassy bombings in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998 and the many other bombings that he has been linked to or even took credit for. He has been on the FBI's most wanted list since around '98 I think it was. I think everyone knew who he was before 9/11. Oh and Saddam is just a scapegoat, huh. Give me a break.

When 9/11 happened,my 1st guess was Bin Laden.This was well before anything was said in the media.I think the only people who did not know who he was were the younger people.Most of my friends and myself have been expecting something to happen.If you watch the news and read the newspaper you know it was only a matter of time before a terrorist group hit America.
If you do research on Saddam you will find out he really is a threat.To his own people his neighbors and other countries through the use of terrorism.
Is Saddam like Hitler?If he had his way he would be.

when 9/11 first happend i thought to myself, That guys sure is a bad Pilot, Ooh wait , no that was not me, that was Mr Bush.

Darren, you continue to show your ignorance and inability for critical thought.

You do realize that not everything you read on the web is true... don't you?

Originally posted by Theyre Here
Darren, you continue to show your ignorance and inability for critical thought.

You do realize that not everything you read on the web is true... don't you?

lol now now, just because i made a d**k outa you son, no need for the anger

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Hitler(Gemany) Saddam(Iraq) Bush(USA)

Yep, get all the dictators!

Lord, I grow weary of stupid posts.

Bush is a properly elected president, elcted in accordance with the constitution of this land, whether you like it or not, and is acting in accordance with the laws, and is defending the nation and the constitution as he is expected to do.

Anyone who thinks Bush is on par with Hitler and Hussein is truly an idiot, or too young and immature to have any understanding of the world. Basically, both options are the same, only physical age differs.

As there is no nation that has both the desire and power to help us if we take a Chamberlain-like position and fail, we have no choice but defend ourselves.

I'm beginning to think some "allies", as well as some people on this board, would like to see us fail to survive this war on terror.

Originally posted by All Seeing Eye
Hitler(Gemany) Saddam(Iraq) Bush(USA)

Yep, get all the dictators!

No it's more like Bush (USA) Blair (Britain). Responding to what Bob88 said, Hitler killed Jews and others, Saddam killed Kurds, Bush will begin to kill Muslims.

There are many Young people on this site and you can tell them appart from the intelligent people. All you school kids should go and kick a ball or something because we know who you are.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne Bush is a properly elected president, elcted in accordance with the constitution of this land, whether you like it or not, and is acting in accordance with the laws, and is defending the nation and the constitution as he is expected to do.

So the Homeland Security Act is in accordance with the Constitution? That's news to me...Where's the proof?

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Anyone who thinks Bush is on par with Hitler and Hussein is truly an idiot, or too young and immature to have any understanding of the world. Basically, both options are the same, only physical age differs.

No, Bush isn't another Hitler...Yet. But he's following a very similar path that got Hitler where he was. Just look at the simularities in *recorded history* of how Hitler took power & compare them to Bush's actions.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
I'm beginning to think some "allies", as well as some people on this board, would like to see us fail to survive this war on terror.

Actually, I hope we *do* survive...As a country that reformed a corrupt government into what it was intended to be, instead of what elitist power-mongers wanted to grab for themselves.

Where I differ with most people who share similar views with me, I don't blame Bush as an individual...I don't blame Carter or Reagan or Bush Sr. or any other individual who found himself in the Oval Office. I blame the system itself & how the government grew too big for its britches & stuck its fingers into more pies than it had any right to touch.

For all of those who think Bush has sinister motives/wants to take over the world/likes killing people/is evil and so on and so forth, I have family who is close to the Bush family..and believe me, they, including little Georgie boy, are pretty darn good people. Really pisses me off. If you think he's stupid fine, if you don't like his policies fine. All that is subjective, but all this conspiracy crap about him is just false, sorry to disappoint you.

All of Bush's "good intentions" are just creating smoother paving on the road to hell...Bush's intelligence aside, that's where the situation is going, whether you recognize it or not.

Even if Bush *is* sincere about his goals, he's been raised in a manipulative family with contacts to other manipulative people & his own history shows that he hasn't even been able to live up to his "grooming". Heavy drug abuse, going AWOL from his military duty, the Homeland Security Act, etc, etc, ad nauseum...If these aren't the bricks for paving the road to hell with, then the world has seen *nothing* yet.

The constitutionality of anything related to the war is irrelevant as we are at war. I'm sure you are aware that when we are in a state of national emergency such as war or martial law, the constitution does not hinder actions necessary for the survival of this nation. You are also aware that we've been under martial law or rule since the 1860's, and you are also aware that it is the Arab world, through proxy that has declared war on the U.S.

And, Catalyst, it'd be pretty stupid to kill Catholics if it is the Muslim world that wants to topple us, wouldn't it. Makes as much sense as frisking little old grandmothers of Irish decent when those who've declared war on us are not little old grandmothers of Irish decent.

Ok, well my first response is this... "TC - you have just shown how entirely out of touch you are with reality."

But on further thought I realised that might be a little harsh. So instead I'll just ask you how you've managed to decide that the US is at war.

Because I don't see any countries on the other side of this war, just a terrorist organisation... and the real point, is that if you're not at war, how can Bush quash all public dissent legally? Surely his scripted press conference the other day is just one more example of a democracy in very serious trouble...

Sorry, this is all a bit OT for this thread, but I feel like there is something very serious here that needs to be talked about...

[Edited on 12-3-2003 by dom]

Hitler like Hussein?

There are certain similarities, but really I don't think that the relationship is all that great. I mean, Hitler did monstrous things. Perhaps the memories are eroded by time, but the massacre of millions of innocent Jews cannot be compared with the attacks that Hussein has ordered on the Kurds. Hussein perceived the Kurds to be a threat to his rule, and certainly there were Kurdish Rebels who sought to bring him down (shame they failed ). Hitler, on the other hand, systematically and ruthlessly murdered the Jews- not because there were any rebels or because they constituted a threat to his regime, but because he was an anti-Semite.

And saying that Hussein would become like Hitler if he had the chance is pretty redundant- I'm sure that many other people would do horrific things given half a chance. If there were no consequences, then the USA would probably seize the Middle East, or if not, certainly crush Cuba.

Shady, I won't dispute your statement that the Bushes are good people (I'm not in a position to argue with that) but there is a clear distinction between Bush as a person, and Bush as a politician. He may be a real nice guy, but nevertheless, sometimes good people do terrible things.

And, to be a pedant, Germany was not given years to 'rebuild its weapons of mass destruction'. After WWI the country was crippled, and suffered severe punishment from the Allies. It was mainly because of these harsh punishments that people turned to extremists like Hitler. I think we sometimes forget that it was Hitler who was evil, not the German people, and that he got to power democratically.

And one thing about disarmament: what happens when the whole world but the USA is 'disarmed' of its WoMD's? Disarmament cannot work unless all countries disarm. After all, if you lose your weapons then you're vulnerable to attack from someone who still has theirs.

Deimos