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

37 answers

Because they don't understand history.

Or, because they know it is the worst thing they could say about our President.

2006-12-21 10:15:11 · answer #1 · answered by ? 7 · 8 7

The whole idea of comparing Bush with Hitler came about when a German government minister brought that up; a German ought to know Hitler's traits better than most.

Maybe people who are calling George Bush a Hitler are trying to bring to attention to the atrocities committed by both from the victims' point of view. If seen thru the mindset of an Iraqi, George can come out worse than Hitler.

The majority of the world seems to feel the same way about Bush and Hitler; maybe because they see more, hear more from their newsmen. It is unfortunate that the US media has been taken over by the Israelis - read "The Greatest Story Ever Sold".

Come to think of it - Saddam was called many things but never a Hitler, But Bush was!

2006-12-21 11:41:55 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

I do not always agree with George. Or most anyone for that matter. I am Jewish and comparing Bush to Hitler is not a fair comparison. He has made some bad decisions and some good. Hitler was a racist psychopath hungry for land and power. Bush is a sitting president doing what he "thinks" is right to protect this nation from further attacks. We are where we are in this situation, lets do what we can together to do what is best for our nation. Bashing the president or a particular party is not part of the solution....Peace to you and happy holidays!

2006-12-21 10:28:12 · answer #3 · answered by frogspeaceflower 4 · 4 2

Because both failed at creating their ideal worlds through war.

The difference between these 2 men that liberals who bring up this comparison fail to realize is that Bush went to war to make countries where everyone would be equal, while Hitler went to war to make nearby countries into satellites of Aryanism, where people of all other races are subordinated to people of the perfect but extinct Aryan race of which Hitler believed the Germans were heirs.

So as anyone can see, the 1 similarity of these 2 men, when looked at closer, is actually reflective of extreme differences between them.

2006-12-22 08:08:19 · answer #4 · answered by STILL standing 5 · 1 0

Hitler had absolute administration over his military even to the factor he made tactical and strategic options. Bush facilitates his generals to regulate and act. it replaced into his generals who asked extra troops, regardless of what the media says. Who even began this asinine rumor that some how Bush sits in this conflict room and pushes markers around a table making militia judgements? the Russian marketing campaign isn't even heavily resembling Iraq! I advise heavily teach even one assessment! and that i advise a valid assessment, no longer in basic terms, it replaced into an invasion. I wager any assessment you may think of up i'm able to disprove. Hitler and Bush, 2 separate men, 2 separate strategies and a pair of separate tips on a thank you to run a conflict. that's a actuality. the only person like Hitler replaced into Hitler.

2016-12-15 05:47:49 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I like the guy!!!!!!!!!!! and i compare them two!!!

Everyone thinks comparing them is a bad thing but both men had the best of intentions. Both men did what they thought was right, what would help their loyal people succeed, what would make their and all life better for the people who previously worked for it a reward, so on and so forth.

I mean seriously... hitler wanted to get rid of all races and such other then his own, in america if we thru out all hispanics and blacks that would cut our poor class by 75% and the last 25% that are white would take their jobs, not to mention a drastic decrease in crime... now as good as that sounds, its not very nice and not even republicans like myself are that mean anymore.

2006-12-22 09:48:18 · answer #6 · answered by TJ815 4 · 1 0

It is mostly hyperbole. I really can't stand the guy and I think he is a horrible leader, but to compare him to Hitler makes the person that utters that hard to take seriously. Seems to me that the people that state things like that as fact are usually either really young and idealistic or uninformed. I'm in my early 20's and I live on a college campus and I meet people like that all the time. In the US it usually seems to be the people that have grown up sheltered or haven't experienced anything that run their mouths without thinking of the power behind comparing someone to Hitler.

2006-12-21 10:28:06 · answer #7 · answered by Meekha 2 · 2 2

Because it's the worst comparison that a person can subject to. Hitler (rightly) represents the ultimate evil. To compare someone to Hitler is basically an easy blow below the belt. I am certainly no fan of Bush, but I think it is totally unnecessary and offensive to compare him or anyone else that someone doesn't agree with, to Hitler. By comparing someone that you hate to Hitler totally trivializes all of the pain and death that Hitler did cause. Bush and his cronies may have committed some pretty stupid mistakes which inadvertantly cost the lives of thousands of US soldiers. But that is no comparison to the millions and millions of people that Hitler slaughtered.

2006-12-21 10:18:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 3

They are mentally sick and have never read a History Book on WWII and Hitler. If President Bush was like Hitler, these very same people would find themselves in prison, being tortured and their families rounded up and
put in Concentration camps and put on hard labor and
there would not be any freedoms at all!!!!

2006-12-21 10:24:05 · answer #9 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 3 3

I think this is because many people are under the assumption that Bush speaks his convictions with false propaganda, such as Hitler did. What many do not understand is that the extremist threat does exist. He actually has the safety of Americans at heart and has even damaged a lot of the Republican campaign efforts in following through with his convictions. This is why I respect him as a leader. Sure, some of his policies are flawed. But at least he does not flip-flop in the face of adverse polling figures. He stands for what he believes.

2006-12-21 10:17:53 · answer #10 · answered by CPT Jack 5 · 4 3

First thing that comes to mind is his invading non-threatening countries. Second thing is his general disdain for civil liberties/the constitution. Dancing around the Geneva Conventions-torture, rendering suspects, warrantless wiretaps, trying to suspend habeas corpus, hold people for years without charge, operating a concentration camp in Cuba, just to name a few.

Hate to think of what he would do without our system of checks and balances.

2006-12-22 14:27:47 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers