Poll: Would You Kill Baby Hitler?

[Penguinness]

I don't know, without ww2 there's a number of large things that could go wrong. The UK wouldn't have looked like much of the good guy, as it wouldn't've given back a lot of it's empire (forgive my historical knowledge, I think it was around this time when the UK gave back a lot of stuff). 50-70 million died during WW2, since then the US has managed to kill 20-30 million through various mini wars and supporting terrorism... the figures could be much higher without WW2 and perhaps a full out war with russia might have happened instead. I also figure that if the US didn't drop the bombs on japan, they would've done to somewhere else eventually. There might also be more hate against the Jewish without WW2.

Aren't I Mr Optimistic.

 

[scarab7]

Too many variables, rather not try and change things. There is also that one paradox, I forgot the name but remember the principle. Here it goes: you go back in time to kill Hitler (this was the example), as soon as you kill him, he's no longer presented in the present as the same, thus preventing you from knowing why you were going to kill him. This means you have no reason to go back in time. There are flaws to this paradox, but it fits the bill for baby Hitler.

 

[scorptatious]

I heard one time he was into painting, wasn't he? I'd just encourage him to take his painting skills and strive to become a great artist.

If that doesn't work, I say leave him be. Killing him at that age could have grave consequences in the present and future.

 

[nomad240]

the biggest problem with yuor theory is statign that someone else wouldn't fill the gap... yes hitler was the leader but with out Gobbles( sp?) or himmiler or it's very own SA ( that he later backstabbd by calling them a terrorist cell.) he fell short.. the beliefs were common place and those that think the american depression was bad.. the germans had it much worse at it's peak a single loaf of bread cost 9,000 marks. because the government had to pay for ALL the damages done to france/ winners. they were simple spread over the treaty of versaille and violated in such a way that left the whole country crying in the cold shower. but hitler managed to change it around when he was elected he pulled the dying people out of the ashes gave moeny to those who needed it. not out of sympathy but he made them work, he made them feel like men and woman with a purpose, a standing.. a reason to live. even though he borrowed a grostesque amount of money to do this and his payback plan was to take them over.

what he did happened and it actually helped the jews.. it made the shocked and scared americans help zionists ( I believe they were called) get that foothold to create the little nation of Israel.

if I had to go back in time. I would go back pick up a few things, memorbilia and what not and watch little hitler's rise to power.... making sure to stay in the shadows. I think it would be an intresting learning experience.

 

[AdmiralMemo]

The main problem with the "kill baby Hitler" argument is that it simply does not take into account the real issue: that Germany was a power-keg at this point in history, mostly from the demoralization and demonization of the country from what was forced upon it at the end of World War 1. If Hitler hadn't done what he did, someone else would most likely have taken his place. World War 2 would still happen. Perhaps it would have happened sooner, later, differently, or whatever, but it would have happened. So killing Hitler would not be the answer. The answer would be to rewrite the treaty Germany signed at the end of World War 1. That would rid the world of World War 2 more effectively than getting rid of Hitler at any point.

The other thing to consider is that World War 2 could have been a whole lot worse. The main thing that undermined Hitler was his own paranoia. If a competent leader were in his place, Nazis might be running the world today.

 

[FightThePower]

I would touch nothing because even though killing Hitler might prevent World War 2, other, worse things could happen. Like for example, the Soviet Union could rise up and start a massive invasion of Europe. And then we'd have to fight against them with our Time Travel technology and Weather Control devices...

 

[Agayek]

We are talking about going into the past were what has already happened has not happened, yet.
The past will not change unless some X factor changes it, be it kiling baby Hitler or to tell his parents to make sure that he does try to be a painter.

How can you block his views when he was a baby? A baby has no view. When he gets older he wont remember a single thing you would have done. Not unless you stayed with him when he gats older and teach him not to be what he becomes.

You're focusing on technicalities. My point is, the sheer fact that you are now in the past may somehow create a situation in which he either never rises to power, or never has the desire to go on a genocidal rampage.

Is it guaranteed to change anything? No. But the possibility is always there.

 

[Zhukov]

"Excuse me Mr and Mrs Hitler, I need to have a word with in regard to your son."

 

[Brad Shepard]

I would rather not change history, so no, besides, my gramps fought in WW2, and he said he had a blast, and i would rather not take that away from him.

 

[Salem_Wolf]

I wouldn't alter the timeline, we are how we are because of what has happened in the past, altering that could have drastic changes we're unaware of. Besides, it's unlikely I'd be able to kill Baby Hitler without being alerted, so imagine being a wanted baby-killer who just "happens" to show up over a century later? I'd keep the limited powers I have and just learn with them, as long as I couldn't do anything to screw up the timeline with my powers, I'd be happy to have what I do.

 

[Elastrius]

I'd sack the fuck up and do it. There's no guarantee of nuclear war if WWII didn't happen and you personally would beg me to if you were European/Chinese in 1940

 

[assassinslover]

No, man. He was just a baby. I'd raise him properly.

 

[Kuilui]

Hmm who knows what kind of change on the future that would have though. I mean any and all wars are horrible especially WW2 but it did bring at least the American and German economies out of the garbage dumps they were festering in. Not to mention lots of advancements were made during world war 2. Radar and jets just to name two. I'm not sure I would want to find out how the future may be if world war 2 didn't happen since it was such a huge thing. Who knows the world might be ruled by the old soviet union or something never having phased out. While I would feel horrible knowing I could save all those innocent people and didn't. I think it is better to not try to re write history. Its not wise to play with fire and re writing history to any degree is playing with a pretty decent sized inferno that could very easily go horribly wrong.

 

[KarumaK]

What are the full extent of the powers?

Actually that's irrelevant, Lotto numbers all of them since I was born. For every single state. I give them to my parents and enjoy... Actually screw that I give them to my slightly younger self and enjoy.

 

[theultimateend]

Ok, lets assume that one day you wake up with extremely limited time-travel powers and the only way to gain the full extent of your time-traveling powers is to travel back to January 1, 1890 in Germany and confront baby Hitler

What would you do in this situation?

Would you kill Baby Hitler?
Would you just take your full upgrade and leave?
Would you do something else?

I WANT TO KNOW!

also if you choose option 3 please elaborate in your post
if you choose another option elaborate anyways

Hitler didn't make Hitler.

Hitler was a product of the environment around him largely. Even if he had been the asshole he was inevitably it was the failings of the allied powers following WW1 that lead to him becoming a leader as he was.

It's not a popular view, because it doesn't promote our patriotic view of how it went down, but it was the reality.

It took the great levels of destitution and incredible charisma for him to become who he became. Had families not had to choose between starvation or salvation they wouldn't have ever chose him...ever.

So you could kill him but you'd just be trying to cure the disease instead of locating and diagnosing the cause which just means the disease will pop up in someone else somewhere else in the future.

I'd sack the fuck up and do it. There's no guarantee of nuclear war if WWII didn't happen and you personally would beg me to if you were European/Chinese in 1940

Had Hitler not become the leader any of a few of his closest partners during the rise of Naziism would have taken the lead and the events may have panned out much worse than they already did. He wasn't necessary for it to spawn and wasn't integral to it succeeding (though he certainly helped).

He was a despicable asshole by the time he was running Germany, but he wasn't the worst of his crew. You'd end up pulling the butterfly effect and realizing you are the cause of an even worse reality.

Then I guess you'd go back in time and kill you before you kill Hitler?

The main problem with the "kill baby Hitler" argument is that it simply does not take into account the real issue: that Germany was a power-keg at this point in history, mostly from the demoralization and demonization of the country from what was forced upon it at the end of World War 1. If Hitler hadn't done what he did, someone else would most likely have taken his place. World War 2 would still happen. Perhaps it would have happened sooner, later, differently, or whatever, but it would have happened. So killing Hitler would not be the answer. The answer would be to rewrite the treaty Germany signed at the end of World War 1. That would rid the world of World War 2 more effectively than getting rid of Hitler at any point.

The other thing to consider is that World War 2 could have been a whole lot worse. The main thing that undermined Hitler was his own paranoia. If a competent leader were in his place, Nazis might be running the world today.

Posts like this make me happy. Though I must say "EPIC NINJA!"

You completely caught all the points I made, talk about a waste of finger wags. Ah well. Keep on truckin' AdmiralMemo.

 

[pigmypython]

The war would have probably happened in some way anyway, besides war promotes progress. More innovations happen during war years than any other...

 

[Sindaine]

Yes. I think I would enjoy drowning that fat little blob with its ugly hair.

 

[Plurralbles]

No, I would kidnap him and raise him as my own. Yes, if he still failed at painting and got his nation's government behind him(the US) the world would look really different, but what are the CHANCES?