The most evil tyrant of 20th century

Simonov · Post by **Simonov** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:00 pm

Bavarian Raven wrote:...how did bombing dresden and killing mostly woman and children and old men help the war effort when the war was clearly won? There were still military targets to hit...

retribution mate. it's always present when war occurs. no side can get out without getting their hands dirty.

krusher · Post by **krusher** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:05 pm

Simonov wrote:
Bavarian Raven wrote:...how did bombing dresden and killing mostly woman and children and old men help the war effort when the war was clearly won? There were still military targets to hit...

retribution mate. it's always present when war occurs. no side can get out without getting their hands dirty.

then I would like to see FDR, Truman and Churchill up there with the other scum bags of the century.

ignotus · Post by **ignotus** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:11 pm

krusher wrote:atrocities happend every where by both sides, its wrong to label your enemys the evil nation and not mention and hide the atrocities that you commited... you think that the American troops didn't kill, rape and steal from the Germans as they were entering through the citys? Funny how they dont mention that in books and dont teach that in schools... I believe you should judge your self before you judge your enemies and if you gona label Hitler the Devil for what some of his troops did, then you should also Label FDR, Truman, Churchill, Stalin the Devil and have them answear for war crimes and label them the same thing as the history books label Hitler.

Yes, atrocities were committed on both sides. And maybe that's not mentioned (enough) in history books. I agree on that facts.

If we take two sides in that war: Allies and Axis, which side had more feelings for dignity of human life? Which side did more "organized crimes" during the war (not just killing Jews, but also Russians, Gypsies, Homosexuals, retarded persons...)? Look the facts up and then answer to this question krusher!

zunzee · Post by **zunzee** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:11 pm

krusher wrote:The American Media has so many people under there influence ... ... ... we have to question this if its really true or if its bias being given to us by a even more corrupted and evil Nation/Empire then the Nazi's.

How do yout define evil? The Nazi Empire was a dictatorship with 0 tolerence for certain racial groups, while racism did exist in the States during WWII, the government did not commit extermination of a certain racial group. The Nazi Empire annexed Austria, invaded Poland, Norway, Denmark, and France, while the US did not join the war until it's land, Pearl Harbour, was invaded. History is written by the winner, and of course certain aspects will be exaggerated and biased. However, the fact is, Hilter is a mass murder, for at least a mass racial murder. there is plenty of historic fact for that

Arbustos · Post by **Arbustos** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:15 pm

krusher wrote:
ignotus wrote:
krusher wrote:igno thats exactly what I posted on my previous posts! I'm not here to debate that Hitler was a good guy. I'm here to debate the lies that the American Media has called hitler and labeled him the devil him self... They are changing history and filling the history books with bias propaganda.

I must admit that when someone mentions Hitler the word Devil pops up as a first on my list.
But your "setting-facts-right" is just misleading and twisting the already proven and undisputed facts. It's not propaganda, it's a fact that Hitler started a war and that most of the atrocities of war were done by germans (at least in Europe). That's a proven fact, and not a trick of American propaganda.

atrocities happend every where by both sides, its wrong to label your enemys the evil nation and not mention and hide the atrocities that you commited... you think that the American troops didn't kill, rape and steal from the Germans as they were entering through the citys? Funny how they dont mention that in books and dont teach that in schools... I believe you should judge your self before you judge your enemies and if you gona label Hitler the Devil for what some of his troops did, then you should also Label FDR, Truman, Churchill, Stalin the Devil and have them answear for war crimes and label them the same thing as the history books label Hitler.

Because the western leaders didn't persecute one people and attempt to exterminate it. What happens on both sides in any war can be atrocious, of course, but what Hitler did just doesn't compare. Besides, both sides were told in my AP US Hist. class... don't stereotype based on your own crappy school.

strike wolf · Post by **strike wolf** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:47 pm

Arbustos wrote:
krusher wrote:
ignotus wrote:
krusher wrote:igno thats exactly what I posted on my previous posts! I'm not here to debate that Hitler was a good guy. I'm here to debate the lies that the American Media has called hitler and labeled him the devil him self... They are changing history and filling the history books with bias propaganda.

I must admit that when someone mentions Hitler the word Devil pops up as a first on my list.
But your "setting-facts-right" is just misleading and twisting the already proven and undisputed facts. It's not propaganda, it's a fact that Hitler started a war and that most of the atrocities of war were done by germans (at least in Europe). That's a proven fact, and not a trick of American propaganda.

atrocities happend every where by both sides, its wrong to label your enemys the evil nation and not mention and hide the atrocities that you commited... you think that the American troops didn't kill, rape and steal from the Germans as they were entering through the citys? Funny how they dont mention that in books and dont teach that in schools... I believe you should judge your self before you judge your enemies and if you gona label Hitler the Devil for what some of his troops did, then you should also Label FDR, Truman, Churchill, Stalin the Devil and have them answear for war crimes and label them the same thing as the history books label Hitler.

Because the western leaders didn't persecute one people and attempt to exterminate it. What happens on both sides in any war can be atrocious, of course, but what Hitler did just doesn't compare. Besides, both sides were told in my AP US Hist. class... don't stereotype based on your own crappy school.

QFT.

Bavarian Raven · Post by **Bavarian Raven** » Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:14 pm

...technically stalin did far worse then hitler...so hitler only rates second...

autoload · Post by **autoload** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:17 am

KHAAAAN!!!!

chessplaya · Post by **chessplaya** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:02 am

Simonov wrote:Reference material:
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/tyrants.htm

So who do u think deserves this title?

Adolf Hitler

Benito Mussolini

Ante Pavelic

Francisco Franco

Mao Zedong

Joseph Stalin

Kim Il Sung

Idi Amin Dada

Saddam Hussein

Radovan Karadzic

I admit i didnt read a single post in this thread .... but I didnt fail to see there is 1 name missing on that list

where the hell is George W. Bush?

doomraider77 · Post by **doomraider77** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:16 am

And Tony Blair, Margeret Thatcher

unriggable · Post by **unriggable** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:58 am

where the hell is George W. Bush?

He's a cool guy. Shitty leader, cool guy. These guys are just erections poking you when you hang out with them, but GWB is cool. That's why.

Good question though.

autoload · Post by **autoload** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:39 am

Once again, I say...

KHAAAAN!!!!

muy_thaiguy · Post by **muy_thaiguy** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 10:42 am

Another leader, Genghis Khan, wouldn't he be up there? Because he sure as hell was one of the bloodiest rulers up until WW1.

Arbustos · Post by **Arbustos** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 1:52 pm

It says twentieth century, guys.

autoload · Post by **autoload** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 2:02 pm

He was, 1996 according to Star Trek...

krusher · Post by **krusher** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:04 pm

Fidel Castro Needs a place up there.

ignotus · Post by **ignotus** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 3:19 pm

krusher wrote:Fidel Castro Needs a place up there.

Oh, we didn't have time to make up all this evidence about his crimes. We were too busy doing Hitler! :twisted:

FenrisLoki · Post by **FenrisLoki** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:22 pm

This is a difficult question. First of all, "evil" can be subjective. No tyrant would consider himself evil, nor would those favored by him, but one's enemies are almost always evil. Very, very few people have the strength of will required to critically analyse themselves and those close to them. I would have to say that in most cases whoever votes for a given tyrant as the most "evil" simply has the least cultural association with said tyrant, rather than making such a decision based on any number of other factors. Even if someone does manage to inspect himself for evil, how we define evil is also cultural and biased against foreigners. Thus, if a German considers Hitler evil, it may be because he acted in an un-German way, where what the German way is can vary widely.

Of the above tyrants, I have most in common with Hitler and Stalin, somewhat less with Mussolini and Franco, less yet with Hussein, Karadzic, and Pavelic, and least with Zedong, Sung, and Dada. Of those final three, I think Dada and Sung were more products of their age and culture than personally evil, so I have to vote for good ol' Chairman Mao.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:25 pm

FenrisLoki wrote:' Chairman Mao.

good choice.

Knight of Orient · Post by **Knight of Orient** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 5:57 pm

cant really call them a tyrant unless they were in power for longer than at least 4 years.... :roll:

Chris7He · Post by **Chris7He** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 6:02 pm

The guy forgot about George Bush Senior...

Gregrios · Post by **Gregrios** » Wed Nov 28, 2007 8:00 pm

It all depends on how you classify "most evil tyrant". If it's to do with the most killed in the 20th century, then it would undoubtably be one of those choices. From what I gather, Mao.

If you determine the most evil tyrant by the person who has had the worst impact on all of civilization, well, she's not on the list. This paticular lady would win every vote for every century from the beginning of time.

Every 10 to a 100 years her name changes but her motivations stay the same. She alone is the reason why the world is the way it is.

"She forsaked her childhood partner and poured out her wrath on all of the world."

Gregrios · Post by **Gregrios** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:55 pm

Gregrios wrote:It all depends on how you classify "most evil tyrant". If it's to do with the most killed in the 20th century, then it would undoubtably be one of those choices. From what I gather, Mao.

If you determine the most evil tyrant by the person who has had the worst impact on all of civilization, well, she's not on the list. This paticular lady would win every vote for every century from the beginning of time.

Every 10 to a 100 years her name changes but her motivations stay the same. She alone is the reason why the world is the way it is.

"She forsaked her childhood partner and poured out her wrath on all of the world."

For the Bible says so!

Chris7He · Post by **Chris7He** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 4:58 pm

Gregrios wrote:It all depends on how you classify "most evil tyrant". If it's to do with the most killed in the 20th century, then it would undoubtably be one of those choices. From what I gather, Mao.

If you determine the most evil tyrant by the person who has had the worst impact on all of civilization, well, she's not on the list. This paticular lady would win every vote for every century from the beginning of time.

Every 10 to a 100 years her name changes but her motivations stay the same. She alone is the reason why the world is the way it is.

"She forsaked her childhood partner and poured out her wrath on all of the world."

Do you mean the devil?

BTW. My mom and her parents lived under Mao's rule. She and her parents wholeheartedly support Mao Zedong, except for when he took away their property. Mao was not a tyrant. He tried to advance China with good intentions, but did not forsee many consequences.

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Fri Nov 30, 2007 5:11 pm

Gregrios wrote:It all depends on how you classify "most evil tyrant". If it's to do with the most killed in the 20th century, then it would undoubtably be one of those choices. From what I gather, Mao.

If you determine the most evil tyrant by the person who has had the worst impact on all of civilization, well, she's not on the list. This paticular lady would win every vote for every century from the beginning of time.

Every 10 to a 100 years her name changes but her motivations stay the same. She alone is the reason why the world is the way it is.

"She forsaked her childhood partner and poured out her wrath on all of the world."

Germaine Greer?

The most evil tyrant of 20th century

Who is the most evil tyrant of 20th century

Re: The most evil tyrant of 20th century