Actually, I seem to recall that Hitler genuinely thought Jews were the
cause of Germany's problems. Of course I don't agree with this
proposition. I am just making the point that just because you think
you are doing good, doesn't mean that you ARE.
Bush's motive is US domination of the Mideast, correct?
Just in case you haven't read the entire thread, I'd like to emphasize
that sending boxcars of people to Auschwitz is several orders of
magnitude more evil than causing civilian casualties in a war, so I am
not equating Bush with Hitler. I was originally speculating that the
Iraqis that are killing other Iraqis may see them as collaborators.
Dana
On Wed, 13 Oct 2004 07:18:39 -0500, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whoa whoa whoa.....Hitler thought he was making the world a better
> place?????
>
> Maybe the history books i've read, and the biographies i've seen are
> different than yours, but it's my understanding that Hitler's motive was
> European domination, making the world better for HIM.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: dana tierney
> To: CF-Community
> Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 5:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Definition of terrorism(WAS The politicization of the Iraq
> War
>
> I was wondering if the motives really matter. Hitler thought he was
> making the world a better place too. So he was trying to be the good
> guy wasn't he?
>
> The only distinction I am able to make is the difference between
> cooperating in genocide and cooperating in a possible beneficial
> invasion. US forces have killed civilians, yes, but not systematically
> and deliberately, by the boxcar, the way the Nazis did.
>
> I am trying and failing to imagine how this would look to me if I were
> poor and Iraqi.
> Would I make this distinction?
>
> Dana
>
> <snip>________________________________
>
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
