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

2006-09-27 08:43:25 · 20 answers · asked by Fleur de Lis 7 in Arts & Humanities History

20 answers

It's easy to pick out a general bad guy like Hitler, Stalin, or bin Laden, but the problem is that it would be difficult to determine how the vacuum would be filled, so to speak. If not Hitler, then who would have led the Nazis, and would that person had been worse?

My answer would be Kaiser Wilhelm II of Germany. If he had never been born, the throne of the German Empire would have in 1888 passed on to Prince Heinrich, who was a lot less egotistical and erratic than Wilhelm turned out to be. He might have allowed Germany to pursue a diplomacy that would have kept a series of competing alliances from building up, leading to one of the worse conflicts in human history.

2006-09-27 10:57:25 · answer #1 · answered by Ѕємι~Мαđ ŠçїєŋŧιѕТ 6 · 3 0

Stalin.

He wouldn't have been around to succeed Lenin and turn the Soviet Union into a totalitarian dictatorship under which millions of people suffered.

Without Stalin, one can argue the Cold War doesn't become nearly as bad as it did.

Without the Cold War, we have no need to "fear" the spread of Communism.

If we don't "fear" the spread of communism, we don't clamor for resources and fear for oil availability when Mossadegh nationalizes Iran's oil industry. We don't overthrow Mossadegh, the democratically elected prime minister of Iran, and give power back to the Shah in 1953. The Shah doesn't abuse his power and neglect his people for more than 20 years, Iran's nationalized oil companies help increase the GDP and quality of life for Iranians, and Ayatollah Khomeini doesn't begin what ultimately would be the Iranian Revolution. Iran doesn't become a religiously fundemental state, and it doesn't hate the US.

If we don't "fear" the spread of communism, we don't fund and train Bin Laden and other freedom fighters in Afghanistan to combat a soviet occupation.

More importantly, idiot republicans don't fund Saddam, give him weapons, encourage him to go to war with Iran because of Iran's hatred toward the US. Saddam doesn't become a mad dictator, and never has the capability to invade Kuwait and give idiot republicans another excuse to stick our grubby hands in middle eastern affairs.

Without Stalin, many of the things that have led Middle Easterners to dispise the US never happen. Of course, the idiots here probably would have still found a way to screw things up in their quest to control world oil supply, but things would have been a little more difficult to justify...

2006-09-27 19:07:42 · answer #2 · answered by Casey D 2 · 4 0

Adolf Hitler
Stalin
Augusto Pinochet
Juan Domingo Perón

The Gadfly is right. Casey D's analysis is brilliant. Give Casey D the 10 points for best answer.

2006-09-27 15:51:59 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Hitler/Bin Laden/Saddam/and the teariest of 9/11

2006-09-27 15:52:05 · answer #4 · answered by Matthew 2 · 0 0

Gork, of the Cave Bear Clan, 33,946 BC, it was his idea to think that a supernatural was the explanation for everything unknown, thus was born religion.

2006-09-27 15:49:30 · answer #5 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 1 0

George W. Bush, Hitler, Bin Laden, Sadam, Idi Amin and the list goes on and on and on.

2006-09-27 16:47:28 · answer #6 · answered by Victoria 4 · 0 0

Nelson R Mandela

2006-09-27 17:09:09 · answer #7 · answered by quinton p 2 · 0 1

George Bush's grandfather.

By God, Casey D., what a brilliant analysis!

2006-09-27 15:53:13 · answer #8 · answered by The Gadfly 5 · 0 0

Hitler, Saddam Husein

2006-09-27 15:46:46 · answer #9 · answered by Kathy W 2 · 0 0

Lenin, Stalin, Hitler

2006-09-27 15:51:28 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers