English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Tony Blair anyone?

2006-07-27 10:24:56 · 77 answers · asked by Pingu's Pal 1 in Society & Culture Other - Society & Culture

77 answers

one day it will be paris hilton

2006-07-27 10:26:17 · answer #1 · answered by Veronica 1 · 7 4

Bush and blair to Hitler...sigh whatever...

Adolf Hitler, the Khmer Ruge of cambodia, the Khans of Mongolia.

being dispised depends on the viewpoint. Some may have despised Alexander the great for all his warring, others loved him for it.

But to the point; Hitlers "regime" is probably the most dispised in recent history, but the atrocities in Cambodia are just as bad and a sad page in history.

2006-07-27 10:30:07 · answer #2 · answered by Devon G 2 · 0 0

Hitler.
Who was Tony Blair.

2006-07-27 12:48:05 · answer #3 · answered by ♥wOwZs♥ 3 · 0 0

Your first question implies that those viewing it will be well-versed in history. Your second reveals either you are not, or chronically parochial in your views.

There are those who would argue that Ghengis Khan was pretty despised. Some would say Judas Iscariot. Others Pontius Pilate, and/or Harrod. Hitler would certainly rank, as would Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Stalin, Mussolini, Slobodon Milosivich, bin Laden, and Saddam Hussein. I remember when Quaddafi was fairly reviled, as was Arafat, but as time goes, we begin to see these latter individuals in a more tempered light.

2006-07-27 10:36:03 · answer #4 · answered by Finnegan 7 · 1 0

Hitler? Genghis Kha? George Bush? Tony Blair is far too soft to be despiseable, he would probably cry or ask Bush what to do!

2006-07-27 10:27:24 · answer #5 · answered by wattsie 2 · 0 0

Adolf Hitler, Saddam Husein, Usame Bin Laden, Abdullah Ocalan

2006-07-27 10:28:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

You would compare Tony Blair to Hitler?

2006-07-27 10:27:01 · answer #7 · answered by krissy4543 4 · 0 0

Adolf Hitler


Why would Tony Blair be more dispised than Hitler?

2006-07-27 11:23:31 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

That depends on who you ask.

If you ask a Sun reader (and i use the word "reader" in a charitable way) he would say Michael Barrymore.

But if you ask a normal person it would be a toss up between Hitler, GW Bush and Blair.

2006-07-27 11:46:01 · answer #9 · answered by haplesboylard 4 · 0 0

A lot of people say Hitler, but the problem there is that he couldn't have done what he did without followers and people wanting to recognise his ideal.
Hitler would have been nothing without his generals behind him.
Those we should despise are the one's that lead women and children to gas chambers, made people work to death in labour camps and shot jewish children. They were close to the awful things that were happening during WWII. Hitler could switch off from it.

There would have been people who gladly sat and smoked a cigarette outside a gas chamber listening to people die and then went home to their wives and children to continue a 'normal' life.

All world leaders would not be able to do what they do without people helping them

I personally vote for George Bush though. Can't stand the man. He makes me cringe when he talks.

Or maybe the child catcher from Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, can't stand him.

2006-07-27 10:39:55 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

I wish I could say Hitler, or Bin Laden but I don't think the statistics would add up. Its got to be a close call. It depends how you look at it but ironically I would think the answer is probably Jesus> Millions of followers of other faiths seem to hate and despise him and what he stands for. That's not to say I think that's good or bad, I just think that's what the statistics would show.

2006-07-27 10:34:11 · answer #11 · answered by cov111 1 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers