History is repeating itself...

The laws are already on the books where he can turn the entire army against its own citizens under the blanket of national security. If you control the most powerful army in the world and don't answer to anyone how is that not absolute power.
 
That was a key for the purpose of making my comparison i dont believe that hitler is equal to bush i am just saying they are both quarterbacks running the same play. I am in no way comparing intentions.
 
Wow, you really have that sarcasm thing down pat don't you? why not try and switch it up, with idk.. humor.. intellience.. something other then cyncism? Maybe that is too much of a stretch for you. If you couldn't tell it was well intentioned and in good nature I have nothing further to discuss. :3

If you've been around for long enough, you'd see diversity.
Doesn't seem like there was ever anything to discuss. Maybe just, to you, there was...idk.
 
Interesting read, and I do see the point you are trying to make. However, as pointed out before, there are some massive differences between the two that would affect such events from happening. One of the biggest is the apporval rating of Bush. Hes going down in history already as being one of the "worst" Presidents ever. Whether or not you believe such a statement, he does not have the country behind him as Hitler did. I cannot believe Bush could take such actions with his massive lack of support.

Such powers that you outlined are rather alarming when one catastrofizes them, but again, even if a President is able to use such powers, I do not believe any one man has absolute power if the rest of the country is not behind it. You can point to the Iraq war as being evidence against this, but at the time of war the country was not nearly against it as they were now. And by the time the majority of the country was against the war, any common sense would tell you that leaving prematurly would have been a massive disaster. As far as now goes, meh, I think any sensible person could make decent arguements for both sides of that debate.

I will agree that we are approaching some lines that should not be crossed, and that a future President with a higher approval rating (and intelligence) were to have such an agenda, there is the potential for us to once again approach some dangerous ground. But I digress, for as corrupt as polititians are and as dumb as the U.S. citizens can be, I do not think we will allow such a thing to happen. There are certain lines that I cannot believe we will allow to be crossed unless under extreme and justifiable circumstances and certainly will not allow said powers to be retained for any length of time. Of course, who knows...we did elect Bush twice...
 
I will agree that we are approaching some lines that should not be crossed, and that a future President with a higher approval rating (and intelligence) were to have such an agenda, there is the potential for us to once again approach some dangerous ground.

This is the point i was hoping that someone would make.
 
We all own guns. The population of the military is miniscule in comparison to the population of the USA as a whole. Not to mention, how many of you all have family in the military that would follow orders to open fire on their fellow Americans.

The 2nd amendment would never allow this to happen. When they start suspending 2nd Amendment rights, that's when you need to worry. That what hitler did to the Jews. As much as I hate bush, he will be gone very soon, and couldn't do this if he wanted to, which i don't think he does.

There is a difference between ignorant greed and angry prejudice. Bush is the former, hitler was the later.
 
Less talk about comparing the USA to Nazi Germany, and more talk about how fucking cool that coin is. I'd let Canada say it's part of us if it meant getting that coin.
 
Less talk about comparing the USA to Nazi Germany, and more talk about how fucking cool that coin is. I'd let Canada say it's part of us if it meant getting that coin.

mexico too?
 
wow ... i seriously just spit water all over my keyboard.. you owe me another g15

lmao
 
My point is more directed as a red flag to people to be careful what powers you do give up because it is naive to think that certain people with unlimited power will not use it to their own means. History has show that "Absolute power corrupts absolutely"

And MY point, in regards to the lame comparison you keep making, is that no matter how much power we invest in the office of the President, we can not "get fucked".

Why, you ask?

Simple.

Nobody fucked Germany. There was no secret rise to power, Hitler worked the system and rose to power through popular support.

Germany fucked itself. They wanted to do what Hitler told them.

No matter how charismatic a leader we get in this country, the fact of the matter is that there will be a sufficient number of people who disagree with him that he couldn't sway the country into some sort of totalitarian regime of doom, if for no other reason that there are enough people with enough guns that this hypothetical demagogue would wind up getting his brains splattered across the wall the first time he set foot outside the White House.

Now, if Bush had tried to take away our guns, I'd be a little more concerned.
 
Have you ever seen the movie.. V for vendetta.

We could honestly be one major disaster away from this kind of a situation in the name of national security i am reminded of a story i heard about a leader who was trying to pick his successor.

He brings both guys into a room and pulls a dove out of a cage. He hands it to the first guy and says this bird represents my empire do not let it fly away. The guy hearing this grips the bird tightly and kills the bird to which the leader states you will not run my country. The second guy hearing this is handed another dove to which he loosely tries to hold onto and it flies off as well. Seeing both of his possible successors failure the leader takes a third bird out of the cage and proceeds to pick out every feather on the birds body. Then he sits the bird shivering in the palm of his hand and the bird makes no motion to move. Then he makes the statement. If you take away everything they will be happy to receive what little you give them.

Whats the best way to become a totalitarian.. to convince other people that it is in their best interest to give you that power.
 
Have you ever seen the movie.. V for vendetta.

We could honestly be one major disaster away from this kind of a situation in the name of national security

The reason that doesn't work very well, is that in V for Vendetta it was the government that caused the disasters at St. Mary's and 3 water's treatment plant so that the governmet could scare the people and then make a massive fortune off selling the antidote.

Unless you believe that Loose Change video (was that the 9/11 conspiracy video?) its pretty unrealistic that the US government. The people in V for Vendetta wanted the government to control everything so that they could be safe, and until V came along they were fairly happy. People here are only willing to accept so many inconviences in the name National Secruity.


Do you really think George Bush is going to do something so massively extreme like declare a state of emergency just so he can take control of a country? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? It would be stupid to want to rule a country like america if you were the most unpopular person in the country. You would never be able to see the light of day again, because you would have to stay inside and away from windows. Chances are if there aren't constant protests, there will always be a healthy supply of rednecks ready to go far more gun-ho then any military person would be.
 
You know why Hitler had support at the beginning to do what he did? Because he was genius. Racial biology was something the whole world, yes, even Sweden and America, had been conducting research in for several decades. Racial biology being that human kind is going down the shitter, due to there being no natural selection going on in the human race. With modern technology and medicine keeping people that were intended to die alive, and retards and handicapped (from birth) getting children, thus spreading there genes forward for future generation. This means that the human DNA will become worse in quality, thus lowering our future chances for survival. Almost the entire world had conducted research in this area.

The goal was to improve the quality of the human genes. To make them purer. For an example, German, and a lot of other countries, had a "pairing" system. You'd recommend people with pure genes, without heart troubles in the family (as it is well-known that those problems can follow you for several generations to come), and good education, to marry each other and get as many children as possible. They would also get better support from the state. Remember, this was something the whole world was doing, and not only Germany. A lot of countries even had a special institute (I believe that's the english word?) for this, called "Institute of Racial Biology". German, before Hitler's rise to power, preferred people with blue eyes, blond etc. to marry each other as long as they had good genes. Some countries, not only Germany, would castrate and sterilize people with retardations and handicaps to prevent them from spreading their bad genes to future generations.

Hitler used this racial biology in his rise to power. In the beginning, he wanted to unite the German-speaking countries under the German flag, as he claimed it would be better that way for all German-speaking countries to be under the same flag. The other European nations, stupidly enough, agreed. Later on, he wanted some other surrounding countries. At this point, Russia became worried of his plans, and told the other countries that they shouldn't give in to his demands. However, they were stupid enough to give him those countries too. Russia was rather upset over this.

Later on, he started attacking other countries, and exterminate the jews, under the pretense that they weren't "pure". Remember, this was all based on a lot of countries' views about racial biology. At this point, the war started, and Russia got their glory in that they were right about Hitler. Hitler, however, was worried about getting attacked from the east, so they made an agreement. If Russia didn't attack him, Hitler would leave them alone. Russia didn't have a lot of military at this time, so they agreed, in order to get a chance to build up their military defense. As they were sure Hitler would attempt to attack them later on anyway. The other countries asked Russia for help, but answered that they were on their own. It was their stupidity, so they can get themselves out of it.

After World War 2, the research about racial biology stopped, and used Hitler and Germany as a scapegoat for it, trying to cover up such research ever took place. In reality though, the entire world held the same philosophy as Hitler did, and performed the very same research. As a matter of fact, the research Hitler's doctors performed are of great medical significance, but due to the inability to duplicate them (as it is illegal to perform such tests on human beings), they are considered obsolete. We still use some of the research which Hitler's doctors used, however. An example of this is lethal injection, used in America to kill criminals.

So no, I can't see any real resemblance between WW2 and the War on Terrorism. However, I will say this, George W. Bush have no real intention of getting all the soldiers out from Iraq, and if possible, he will try to get the other presidents to follow in his footsteps. I do hope your next president isn't as stupid as George W. Bush.

George W. Bush won't have a chance to take complete control over America. In order to become a dictator, it requires someone with a strong personality and the courage to take chances and risk everything. It requires someone with good charisma that can stand out from other people and get them to follow him. It also requires an opportunity, such as an unhappy population. Personally, I don't see George W. Bush fit in to that.
 
Last edited:
The reason that doesn't work very well, is that in V for Vendetta it was the government that caused the disasters at St. Mary's and 3 water's treatment plant so that the governmet could scare the people and then make a massive fortune off selling the antidote.

Unless you believe that Loose Change video (was that the 9/11 conspiracy video?) its pretty unrealistic that the US government. The people in V for Vendetta wanted the government to control everything so that they could be safe, and until V came along they were fairly happy. People here are only willing to accept so many inconviences in the name National Secruity.


Do you really think George Bush is going to do something so massively extreme like declare a state of emergency just so he can take control of a country? Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing? It would be stupid to want to rule a country like america if you were the most unpopular person in the country. You would never be able to see the light of day again, because you would have to stay inside and away from windows. Chances are if there aren't constant protests, there will always be a healthy supply of rednecks ready to go far more gun-ho then any military person would be.

Well personally i do believe that the government was somewhat involved in 9/11 and i have made that clear in a couple of places which i can go into the exact reasons i believe that if someone wants me to, but i honestly never thought that people would be willing to give up habeas corpus in the sake of national security which no one can argue that we have done. With that in mind it is no longer a huge stretch for me that people would be willing to be further imprisoned by laws and give up further rights that we hold dear. It scares me that if there was a large scale event where guns were involved, like another Waco or perhaps even worse like if someone actually took over a building and had captives, that we could then repeal the second amendment (in the interest of national security) and the common person who is living in fear because of the events would be more than willing to give up even more rights.

Do you really think George Bush is going to do something so massively extreme like declare a state of emergency just so he can take control of a country?
Not necessarily but i am making this argument as a warning to watch what rights you are willing to give up because it is a slippery slope towards having no rights. I believe it was franklin who wrote, "those who would give up a little liberty, to gain a little security, deserve neither, and will lose both."

I mean it is written Under Article 1, Section 9, clause two of the constitution, “The privilege of the Writ of Habeas Corpus shall not be suspended, unless when in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion the public Safety may require it.”

Were we being invaded or is there a rebellion that i am missing somewhere?

Or are you just arguing for the sake of arguing?
I will be honest and answer somewhat because my point is that we are starting to go places where there is no coming back from.

It would be stupid to want to rule a country like america if you were the most unpopular person in the country. You would never be able to see the light of day again, because you would have to stay inside and away from windows. Chances are if there aren't constant protests, there will always be a healthy supply of rednecks ready to go far more gun-ho then any military person would be.

If he was protecting us why would he be the most unpopular person in America, I am not advocating that i think that bush will take the country by force (atleast not openly) I am stating that if we are not careful we are basically going to ask him to take it.

People here are only willing to accept so many inconviences in the name National Secruity.
Ok lets look at this statement a little bit more closely. So far we have given the president the right to declare martial law where there will be public curfews and military patrolling our streets at night. We have given up the right to be told what crime we are being arrested for and being held in prison for it. hell in the Hamdi v. Rumsfeld case which went to the supreme court the patriot act was basically determined to be unconstitutional because of its suspension of habeas corpus. On top of all this we gave up the right to privacy with the government being able to wiretap freely anyone who they once again saw as a threat. At what point do they go to far? Once we are all wearing RFID chips in our arms so that we know where all the dangerous people are.

RFID chips are the next step they are already trying to pass regulation where people would have to carry national ID cards with bar codes and RFID chips on them so that we can all be identified. The step after that is to say who needs the cards we can just implant it in your arm.

http://www.news.com/National-ID-cards-on-the-way/2100-1028_3-5573414.html

Anyways i think that the laws are just getting on the books so that when something else happens even after bush is out of office the next person will be set up to take even more away from us and since they were not the ones that made the laws they wont be hated nearly as much.
 
Last edited:
You know why Hitler had support at the beginning to do what he did? Because he was genius. Racial biology was something the whole world, yes, even Sweden and America, had been conducting research in for several decades. Racial biology being that human kind is going down the shitter, due to there being no natural selection going on in the human race. With modern technology and medicine keeping people that were intended to die alive, and retards and handicapped (from birth) getting children, thus spreading there genes forward for future generation. This means that the human DNA will become worse in quality, thus lowering our future chances for survival. Almost the entire world had conducted research in this area.

The goal was to improve the quality of the human genes. To make them purer. For an example, German, and a lot of other countries, had a "pairing" system. You'd recommend people with pure genes, without heart troubles in the family (as it is well-known that those problems can follow you for several generations to come), and good education, to marry each other and get as many children as possible. They would also get better support from the state. Remember, this was something the whole world was doing, and not only Germany. A lot of countries even had a special institute (I believe that's the english word?) for this, called "Institute of Racial Biology". German, before Hitler's rise to power, preferred people with blue eyes, blond etc. to marry each other as long as they had good genes. Some countries, not only Germany, would castrate and sterilize people with retardations and handicaps to prevent them from spreading their bad genes to future generations.

Hitler used this racial biology in his rise to power. In the beginning, he wanted to unite the German-speaking countries under the German flag, as he claimed it would be better that way for all German-speaking countries to be under the same flag. The other European nations, stupidly enough, agreed. Later on, he wanted some other surrounding countries. At this point, Russia became worried of his plans, and told the other countries that they shouldn't give in to his demands. However, they were stupid enough to give him those countries too. Russia was rather upset over this.

Later on, he started attacking other countries, and exterminate the jews, under the pretense that they weren't "pure". Remember, this was all based on a lot of countries' views about racial biology. At this point, the war started, and Russia got their glory in that they were right about Hitler. Hitler, however, was worried about getting attacked from the east, so they made an agreement. If Russia didn't attack him, Hitler would leave them alone. Russia didn't have a lot of military at this time, so they agreed, in order to get a chance to build up their military defense. As they were sure Hitler would attempt to attack them later on anyway. The other countries asked Russia for help, but answered that they were on their own. It was their stupidity, so they can get themselves out of it.

After World War 2, the research about racial biology stopped, and used Hitler and Germany as a scapegoat for it, trying to cover up such research ever took place. In reality though, the entire world held the same philosophy as Hitler did, and performed the very same research. As a matter of fact, the research Hitler's doctors performed are of great medical significance, but due to the inability to duplicate them (as it is illegal to perform such tests on human beings), they are considered obsolete. We still use some of the research which Hitler's doctors used, however. An example of this is lethal injection, used in America to kill criminals.

So no, I can't see any real resemblance between WW2 and the War on Terrorism. However, I will say this, George W. Bush have no real intention of getting all the soldiers out from Iraq, and if possible, he will try to get the other presidents to follow in his footsteps. I do hope your next president isn't as stupid as George W. Bush.

George W. Bush won't have a chance to take complete control over America. In order to become a dictator, it requires someone with a strong personality and the courage to take chances and risk everything. It requires someone with good charisma that can stand out from other people and get them to follow him. It also requires an opportunity, such as an unhappy population. Personally, I don't see George W. Bush fit in to that.

you are correct that eugenics was a driving force in the purification movement in germany but Hitler took it a step farther than the americans were willing to do (with america's forced sterilization) and took that next step into extermination. How was he able to accomplish this.. the same way as everything is accomplished.. fear. He was able to make the german people believe not only that they were superior to the jews but also that the jews were evil and the source of all of their problems much like our current war on terror where we are willing to give up habeas corpus so that we can arrest the terrorists and detain them because we are afraid of what they might do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eugenics
read the section on america

How much more will the American people endure?

"Find out just what people will quietly submit to, and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed on them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."

---Frederick Douglass, African-American slave, and abolitionist

i found a new book i think i am going to pick up today if anyone else is interested in it because it seems to be somewhat on the subject that we are talking about.
http://www.amazon.com/Nation-Sheep-Andrew-P-Napolitano/dp/1595550976
 
Last edited:
Yes, I know. The thing is, USA have never actually followed the constitutions very well at all. "Freedom of Speech" and God's Country are mainly things said to calm the public. You have the state censoring out swear word from movies, while freedom of speech states that people have the right to say what they want. There's no law that swear words are not allowed to be said on television, but still you censor them out. You're not allowed to shout "George W. Bush sucks!" in a room where George W. Bush is holding a speech, and you'd most likely be arrested for "disrupting civil peace" or w/e its called. But yet, you're allowed to protest against homosexuality etc.

And yes, a lot of countries are ruled by fear. However, Hitler did have support from not only the people, but almost the entire world before the war broke out. Once the war broke out, a great majority of the Germans still supported his cause. Let's face it, he was a good leader for the German people, but he didn't consider anyone else.

Besides, I hate how everyone say that World War 2 is one of the largest most wide-spread war in histories, claiming the most lives and causing the most pain in history. When Europeans populated Africa and split their continent up with a ruler between them, and used them as slaves in their own mines for us to make money, we cut their hands off if they didn't work fast enough. Naturally, that would make them work faster, right? Millions of people died every month. But you don't hear people mention that, do you? Because that's not in the "civilized world". That's also because you can't use it to turn someone in to a scapegoat to set a bad example.

The whole world is ruled by hypocrisy and money. I can't blame them though. It is in human's instincts to protect what is ours. What is closest to us. The whole world is based on that. First the single individual, then the family, then friends, then state, then country, then continent. Rule the money and you can rule the people.
 
Back
Top