Kernel39 Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 This is absolutely a true story, and I'm sure that priest eventually felt awful that he didn't allow baby fuhrer to drown. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2082640/How-year-old-Adolf-Hitler-saved-certain-death--drowning-icy-river-rescued.html
Slath Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Don't think so. Have you heard about the butterfly effect ? If you change on little thing in the past, it can change the whole future. Maybe, if the kid didn't fell in the river, he would've grown up to be a good and loving man. Maybe, if he had that schnitzel he begged his mama for when he was 8, he wouldn't have become one of the biggest camper (8 000 000 000+ / 1) of the century. Maybe, if the priest didn't save him, 3 other people would've grown up to form a nazi government even stronger than Hitler was. We can't change the past, and I say it's just fine. So I don't think the priest had regrets. Not if he's smart. It's not life if he could've predicted it.
Guest marieruth Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 If a person who saw a kid drowning knew they could help them, and wanted to, they would do so. They wouldn't think about much else at the time. Also, people aren't psychic, so there would be no way to determine how some kid who almost drowned in a river would turn out to be. It's like people forget that Hitler was a human being, and anyone could become what he became. If not him, another would be in his position.
Slath Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Oh, and since I can say it without winning any godwin point ... Hitler didn't become a fearsome dictator because he was denied entry in an art school. Someone with such a temper wouldn't have made it to the top. That he reached legally, btw.
Kaz Aanh Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Even if he died, you don't know how history would go on. There could be a Hitler 2.0 or maybe even something worse.
Chaos63 Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 No man worthy of the name would intentionally let a child die. I'd do the same godamn thing.
nonusnomeni Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 No man worthy of the name would intentionally let a child die. I'd do the same godamn thing. +++++ and if he does how he could say he is better than hitler
Chaos63 Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 No man worthy of the name would intentionally let a child die. I'd do the same godamn thing. +++++ and if he does how he could say he is better than hitler Exactly.
Sarathis Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Hitler was not the only person in the Nazi regime. If he hadn't been around things would have been very different, yes, but It's doubtful whether the second world war or even the holocaust would have been prevented. With people like Himmler, Frick, Goebbels, Eichmann, Hess, Mengele, etc... around feeling the hate, resentment and humiliation that most Germans experienced following the end of WWI the advent of another world war was pretty inevitable. People in the United States congress told Woodrow Wilson flat out when they refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles that it would lead to a worse war than the first. They could see that coming in 1918. As for Hitler, the man had a horrible childhood with an abusive ass of a father, a traumatic young adulthood fighting in the trenches and suffering from mustard gas in WWI, and a succession of bitter personal disappointments in between. Nobody becomes a genocidal maniac from just one stimulus, even one defining moment. It's a process. Priest or average joe off the street, I think anyone would have tried to save a drowning four year old and not regretted doing it, regardless of who he turned out to be. I know I would have.
nonusnomeni Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Hitler was not the only person in the Nazi regime. If he hadn't been around things would have been very different, yes, but It's doubtful whether the second world war or even the holocaust would have been prevented. With people like Himmler, Frick, Goebbels, Eichmann, Hess, Mengele, etc... around feeling the hate, resentment and humiliation that most Germans experienced following the end of WWI the advent of another world war was pretty inevitable. People in the United States congress told Woodrow Wilson flat out when they refused to ratify the Treaty of Versailles that it would lead to a worse war than the first. They could see that coming in 1918. As for Hitler, the man had a horrible childhood with an abusive ass of a father, a traumatic young adulthood fighting in the trenches and suffering from mustard gas in WWI, and a succession of bitter personal disappointments in between. Nobody becomes a genocidal maniac from just one stimulus, even one defining moment. It's a process. Priest or average joe off the street, I think anyone would have tried to save a drowning four year old and not regretted doing it, regardless of who he turned out to be. I know I would have. agreed hitler was just reflection of his time and place set was staged long time before he was born some educated peoples call that line of historical events or as common peoples say for "positive characters" he was on the right place in right time
gameleirabh Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Not only Hitler and company but a movement of the extreme right in Europe at that time, like in Spain and Italy. Mainly as opposing forces against the later "red enemy" of, mainly, the americans.
ToJKa Posted March 5, 2015 Posted March 5, 2015 Then it would have been Stalin who started WW2, his reign wasn't any gentler. Not to mention what the Japanese were doing in the far east. There was a lot of horrible shit going on back then. Hell, there's a lot of horrible shit going on right now. Not only Hitler and company but a movement of the extreme right in Europe at that time, like in Spain and Italy. And it is worrying how extreme right parties have again been starting to gain popularity in Europe.
gameleirabh Posted March 6, 2015 Posted March 6, 2015 Seems like history teaches nothing. Any of them would have been started one more war beyond many interests and mainly to show the others how big one penis is in the end. Think about the pointless of any of this discussions: politics, religion, anything is only about domination over the others. Any name would fit, any party would fit, anything would fit.
Angrybird Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Yeah let a child drown for something he hasn't done yet, nice minority reporting there, it's like that talk I've heard countless times about going back in time and kiling Hitler, sad, if I had a time machine I'd be taming dinasours bring them back, build a farm and litle girls would ask for a pterodactyl instead of a pony, sad unimaginative twats. Also that article blows, only coulds and maybies and add a pic of jew kids in a concentration camp for good measure, everything that comes out of anglo-american academia about ww2 is deplorably unscientific and ridiculous.
SpleenSerene Posted March 7, 2015 Posted March 7, 2015 Yeah let a child drown for something he hasn't done yet, nice minority reporting there, it's like that talk I've heard countless times about going back in time and kiling Hitler, sad, if I had a time machine I'd be taming dinasours bring them back, build a farm and litle girls would ask for a pterodactyl instead of a pony, sad unimaginative twats. Also that article blows, only coulds and maybies and add a pic of jew kids in a concentration camp for good measure, everything that comes out of anglo-american academia about ww2 is deplorably unscientific and ridiculous.
Slath Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 Yeah let a child drown for something he hasn't done yet, nice minority reporting there, it's like that talk I've heard countless times about going back in time and kiling Hitler, sad, if I had a time machine I'd be taming dinasours bring them back, build a farm and litle girls would ask for a pterodactyl instead of a pony, sad unimaginative twats. Also that article blows, only coulds and maybies and add a pic of jew kids in a concentration camp for good measure, everything that comes out of anglo-american academia about ww2 is deplorably unscientific and ridiculous. I'm sorry, but I must ask: What is your addition to the conversation ? Without any animosity.
SpleenSerene Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 I'm sorry, but I must ask: What is your addition to the conversation ? Without any animosity. I forgive you.
Slath Posted March 8, 2015 Posted March 8, 2015 I'm sorry, but I must ask: What is your addition to the conversation ? Without any animosity. I forgive you. Yet you didn't answer the question. Are you some kind of sophisticated troll ?
SpleenSerene Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 I'm sorry, but I must ask: What is your addition to the conversation ? Without any animosity. I forgive you. Yet you didn't answer the question. Are you some kind of sophisticated troll ? Hey no one said contributing with something constructive was mandatory!
Slath Posted March 10, 2015 Posted March 10, 2015 Hey no one said contributing with something constructive was mandatory! I'm just sayin'. Nobody will care about your post if it's useless. On the other hand, people will be pissed to see useless junk everywhere. But that's only my opinion. ^^
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.