Would you go back in time to kill a teenage Hitler?

P

Padre

Milforum Chaplain
If you could go back in time, would you do so to kill Hitler when he was a child or teenager? Or alternatively, substitute Hitler for Stalin, or Pol Pot, or Saddam, or Osama Bin Laden or anyone who might make the grade as a universally or at least a widely despised figure because of their future destruction of so many lives.
 
No.

As much as the temptation is there to do so there is the problem that in killing [insert bad guy here] there is no guarantee that the world would be any better for the action (Who knows Hitler may have turned out to be the moderate option).

I will still with the old maxim of better the devil you know.
 
The guy's works became a hit after his death and has been the source of oppression for billions of people over thousands of years.
It's a pain in the ass like you won't believe.
Would have loved to have killed him before he wrote his works.
 
If entropy didn't kick in and make the world a worse place, I would liquidate Hitler and his minions in a heart beat. There would be six million deaths plus all of the bloodshed of war that could have been averted.

Would the world be a better place .. I am not certain .. however, the pestilence of the evil that WWII represented might not have happened.
 
Chief Bones said:
If entropy didn't kick in and make the world a worse place, I would liquidate Hitler and his minions in a heart beat. There would be six million deaths plus all of the bloodshed of war that could have been averted.

Would the world be a better place .. I am not certain .. however, the pestilence of the evil that WWII represented might not have happened.
Click to expand...

Six millions, nah make it 9 or 10, and then you're on the track, unless you only count the victims of Jewish origin that is.

Now to the question, and the answer is no!

The short version of my reason is similar to Monty's.

The longer version is based upon the fact that Germany was a ruin when Hitler started on his way to the top, and there was just as likely that the communists would have taken over if Hitler and the nazi's didn't seize power.

Even though it seems like a more peacefull alternative, a democratic Poland surrounded by communist Germany and the Soviet Union would eventually have sparked a war none the less.
 
Yeah, when I met a lot of only sons or first sons and in some cases where there were none, first daughters, they had problems whose roots were very similar to mine. And it all pointed to the works of Confucius which marks us as property of parents, and not as individuals with rights to make our own decisions in life.
 
A Can of Man said:
The guy's works became a hit after his death and has been the source of oppression for billions of people over thousands of years.
It's a pain in the ass like you won't believe.
Would have loved to have killed him before he wrote his works.
Click to expand...

I did not know that.
 
I raised the question in part because a person I know was arguing with me about the Norway massacre, arguing that the killer may have killed a future Norwegian Labour leader who would give in too much to the demands of a fast growing Muslim population, and said to me if we had a crystal ball and could see this in the future then why wait - why not act now? A bit like the Terminator movies where they go back in time to kill the creator of the machines to save humanity from the machine WWIII. But I have reservations about this kind of thinking plus it destroys the possibility of redemption by the innocent who later turn evil. But then again if we apply this to Hitler I think most people would agree to kill him when he was young and spare the 50 million lives he would go on to destroy directly and indirectly
 
Padre said:
I raised the question in part because a person I know was arguing with me about the Norway massacre, arguing that the killer may have killed a future Norwegian Labour leader who would give in too much to the demands of a fast growing Muslim population, and said to me if we had a crystal ball and could see this in the future then why wait - why not act now? A bit like the Terminator movies where they go back in time to kill the creator of the machines to save humanity from the machine WWIII. But I have reservations about this kind of thinking plus it destroys the possibility of redemption by the innocent who later turn evil. But then again if we apply this to Hitler I think most people would agree to kill him when he was young and spare the 50 million lives he would go on to destroy directly and indirectly
Click to expand...

Ok lets use Hitler as the test case and he gets killed before WW1.

However WW1 goes ahead as he wasn't the instigator and the result is the same as Hitler didn't do anything outstanding that would have changed things.

The Weimar republic comes into existence and the world carries on, Germany secretly builds its armoured divisions, submarines and air force at Russian bases as this all happened before Hitler came to power and the world has its great depression as Hitler never caused that.

Now you reach the early 1930s with exactly the same conditions as you would have had with Hitler alive, WW2 is becoming inevitable due to the short comings of the Treaty of Versailles but instead of having a raving lunatic running what was probably the worlds best trained and equipped army you have professional soldiers.

WW2 without the randomness of Hitler's decisions, chances are you have German Jews serving in the German army so it is a million or so stronger, you have the best scientists working on German armaments, instead of slave labour building shoddy weapons you have professional craftsman and the likes of Einstein helping Germany build its own bomb to me that is a far more scary scenario than a lunatic that destroyed himself and his own country.

So I stick by the argument while there is no way of tell what the outcome would have been with different variables we know the outcome of history and while it is not perfect it is better than it could have been.
 
Padre said:
I raised the question in part because a person I know was arguing with me about the Norway massacre, arguing that the killer may have killed a future Norwegian Labour leader who would give in too much to the demands of a fast growing Muslim population, and said to me if we had a crystal ball and could see this in the future then why wait - why not act now? A bit like the Terminator movies where they go back in time to kill the creator of the machines to save humanity from the machine WWIII. But I have reservations about this kind of thinking plus it destroys the possibility of redemption by the innocent who later turn evil. But then again if we apply this to Hitler I think most people would agree to kill him when he was young and spare the 50 million lives he would go on to destroy directly and indirectly
Click to expand...

I must admit that my positive response was in part a purely personal re-action. He tried his damnest to kill me as a child for six years. I plead self-defence.

Seriously, I searched myself, considered his victims, added on his intended victims, and found no hesitation in my conclusion.
 
MontyB said:
Ok lets use Hitler as the test case and he gets killed before WW1.

However WW1 goes ahead as he wasn't the instigator and the result is the same as Hitler didn't do anything outstanding that would have changed things.

The Weimar republic comes into existence and the world carries on, Germany secretly builds its armoured divisions, submarines and air force at Russian bases as this all happened before Hitler came to power and the world has its great depression as Hitler never caused that.

Now you reach the early 1930s with exactly the same conditions as you would have had with Hitler alive, WW2 is becoming inevitable due to the short comings of the Treaty of Versailles but instead of having a raving lunatic running what was probably the worlds best trained and equipped army you have professional soldiers.

WW2 without the randomness of Hitler's decisions, chances are you have German Jews serving in the German army so it is a million or so stronger, you have the best scientists working on German armaments, instead of slave labour building shoddy weapons you have professional craftsman and the likes of Einstein helping Germany build its own bomb to me that is a far more scary scenario than a lunatic that destroyed himself and his own country.

So I stick by the argument while there is no way of tell what the outcome would have been with different variables we know the outcome of history and while it is not perfect it is better than it could have been.
Click to expand...

interesting take on this Monty. I think you make a good point.

can't blame you Del for having a personal motive to the topic. Descendants of the few survivors of the camps would feel the same way no doubt
 
Going back in time to kill Hitler creates a paradox: He would no longer exist, so you would no longer need to do it, meaning that you would never need to travel, meaning that you would not have killed him, meaning that he would exist, meaning you would then travel back in time to kill him, etc, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top