Hypothetical Question. It's 1909 and you're alone with a young artist named Adolph Hitler. Do you kill him?
Answers:
(assuming I learn and am at least somewhat fluent in German.)
I'd meet him at the coffeehouse or wherever the student-artists of the time hung out. I'd buy him a beer and a meal, and we'd hang out talking about art. I'd show him my stuff, with its various half-completed ink sketches of Pauly the Anthro-Dragon and so forth, and once he put one and one together and realized I was from the future (noticing the little copyright dates I put at the bottom of every finished picture), I'd assure him Zionist saboteurs had not spiked his beer!
I'd somehow find a way to show what happened over the next half century---World War I, abdication of Kaiser Wilhelm II, the 11/11/1918 armistice, the 1919 Treaty of Versailles, the crippling economic sanctions, the horrific depression, the Ruhr crisis, and then pause it at the beer hall putsch of 1923. I'd pause right there and let him gt his bearings, because that's an awful lot of history in 14 years!
We'd both agree that one of his basic strengths is political charisma, because it takes someone with major intestinal fortitude and persuasion to simply pull the putsch without the assistance of brainwashing or illegal drugs. As with all things, political charisma has both bright and dark sides, and even political extremism can be stopped dead in its tracks.
"What the heck are you talking about?" says Hitler, dismissing me with an arrogant gesticulating sneer---an eerie resemblance of Nazi rallies yet to come. But since I bought him a decent meal and a good brew, and I'm from the future, he doesn't get up an leave. He quietly chuckles at some of Pauly the Anthro-Dragon's half-inked antics.
"I agree the Treaty of Versailles is going to be an extremely awful thing, and it in fact very much helps set up the conditions required for the European theater of World War Two, which is immeasurably more awful than World War One, though WW2 doesn't have the senseless trench warfare of WW1 . . . " and then I go on to explain (and showing, as I have the power to reveal the future to Hitler in exacting detail!) what happens after President Hindenburg dies, and Chancellor Hitler becomes "der Feuhrer" in 1933. Then I run him through all the horrible trappings and temptations that come with such power.
Hitler is justifiably proud to see the revitalization of Germany, but it all starts going terribly wrong when the Rhineland is remilitarized in 1936. I tell him something like: "You could have made your grand finale with the Berlin Olympics, and though you're a dictator, you would have had the envy of the world if you had chosen peace, and tempered your nationalism and industriousness with rationality and peace."
Hitler gives me a look of utter disdain, and sips his beer.
"OK, Adolf, you aren't going to realize this now, but your passions are going to be unchecked, and that---combined with your life history so far---is going to mean trouble for yourself, your friends and family, your allies, and both Germany AND Austria. If you thought Kaiser Wilhelm was stupidly arrogant for having dismissed Otto von Bismarck, you have no idea how much you're going to outdo His Imperial and Royal Majesty. None at all! And to be quite frank, there's no need for it."
But instead of breaking out into his famous fiery harangues, Hitler just sort of glares at me sidelong. Yet he's nodding, just a bit, because I've shown him firsthand what's going to happen in the future. "You commit suicide in May 1945, and with your death is the virtual end of the European theater of World War Two. The Pacific theater ends in September 1945, but it has absolutely nothing to do with Japanese sentiment for Adolf Hitler."
Hitler sighs, then downs the rest of his beer. "So what's your point, man?"
I can't help but laugh a little. "My point is, Adolf, that you will be suffering from mental illnesses which will completely get in the way of your rationality. Case in point: after signing a non-agression pact with Josef Stalin in 1940 after the conquest of Poland is complete, you invade the Soviet Union in 1941, letting your bigotry and hatreds get in the way of diplomacy in tact. Sure, you can hate the Russians and communism is the exact opposite of fascism, but since the future USSR is huge and enormous, you don't want to invade them, because it will hasten your downfall. If you'd kept the Soviets neutral, you quite likely would have won World War Two since all your military efforts could be concentrated on the French, the British and the Low Countries. You'd be able to wheel and deal with the USA and avoid war with them altogether. The USA is going to war with Japan anyway, so let them deal with that. But let's just say you avoid ALL OF THAT WARFARE altogether. You just become a huge industrial power, have the best military in the world which rarely sheds blood"---point to future Swiss and Swedish militaries as examples of very formidable armies that don't go to war---"
"But what is wrong with dying for the glory of the German Fatherland? Have you no patriotism for America?"
"You wouldn't, either, if George W. Bush was your leader," I chuckle.
"Huh?"
"The point is, ADOLF, you can avoid an incredible amount of pain and suffering if you keep up on your mental health. In my time, there is so much medical treatment that even Sigmund Freud would be astonished."
"Dirty Jew, that Sigmund Freud!"
"Adolf, calm down . . . you can be as racist as you want to be, but if you take care of yourself, this world will be much safer if and when you do come to power, for the future is never completely certain unless you take care of the present. Germany alone is going to lose more than seven MILLION people in world War Two. Don't go there, Adolf. Come to the future with me, and we'll get you treated for whatever you might have. Of course, we'll give you a fake identity as you are the most hated person in human history . . . "
(Long story short, I wouldn't kill Hitler in 1909!)
nope, this world wouldnt be the same without him and it would be overly infested with the jewish people and the united states wouldnt be the badass country that they became after ww2 without that racistbastard!
Hypothetical Answer
1 How do one know that Hitler will be Monster in future?
2 Why should one commit crime when one has no idea what will Hitler will be?
3 No I will leave that up to you to decide KILL OR NOT TO KILL
4 If you become killer then you are no better then Hitler himself
Overly-infested with Jewish people?? what the hell is wrong with people??
Yes, immediately! That one evil life in exchange for 3 million plus lives? I'd do it in a second, I'd put him down like a rabid dog!
I'd explain to him about the political benefits of drug testing, how to set up a lab, what to charge, how to advertise and what the appropriate punishment should be. 1909 is a little too early, so lets move your timeframe to the agony of the Great Depression 1932-33.
Is this one of those "If I knew then what I know now" kinda deals? Assuming it is, No, you dont kill the guy. Reason being, we know what happened... If you kill Hitler we dont know what would replace him and what would happen after that. Imagine if Germany nuked the United States and we lost the war. Instead of killing Hitler, a better solution might be to educate him... or perhaps influence him to more civilized ends,
Or you could be alone with the son of a brutal alcoholic cobbler named Joseph Stalin. Do you kill him?
Killing Hitler may have prevented the war and the Holocaust from happening. Although the war may have been inevitable given the state of Germany after the Treaty of Versailles. But you would have no way of knowing what Hitler would become so I don't see what would prompt someone to kill him as early as 1909.
If I could possibly know what Hitler would become and I had the opportunity I would probably have taken him out though. I don't know if that would keep someone else from fulfilling his destiny or what affect that would have on history. Mr. Stalin admired Hitler (until Operation Barbarossa anyway) and may have likely been the catalyst for the next big European war if Hitler hadn't of beat him to it.
But those are all hypothetical and you can armchair them to death.
Actually, 1909 might have been an amazing opportunity for someone to reach into Hitler's life. At that point, he had been rejected by the art world, his mother had died, and he had ended up in a homeless shelter. Maybe if someone had come into his life at that point, and shared the love that Christ offers, before he became immersed in literature from anti-semitic and anti-Christian authors, he might have found a worthwhile purpose for his life. So, no, I would not have killed him, but I would have tried to share with him how much God loved and treasured him.
you have no idea what changes could have occurred. Half of us probably wouldn't be here right now. Or maybe we would. I would stick to keeping things the way they are now.
Its 1909.
(Q) Has he committed any offence?
(A) No.
Because at that moment in time he is innocent of any offence, to kill him before he offends would make you what he will become. A killer of the innocent.
In fact even in 1909 the almighty cant know the events before that have happened so even the almighty would have to allow all of us to control our own destiny.
If we were to allow ourself to apply the kill him choice,
then we would also have to apply that same logic to ourself that we just applied to him. There for we would also have to be killed.
If we did follow this logic right through then I fear we should all be killed as anyone of us could kill another person if the circumstances are right.
No. Who am I to personally question the course of events that makes up our world history? Hitler might not have been a truly evil person. How can I judge his private motivations? In his own demented mind he may have truly believed he was helping the world by killing Jews, Gypsies, and Slavs.
Just look at Hitler outside of his time period. He was a small, silly man. Mentally unsettled for sure. In any other place or time period, he would be little more than a clown (as indeed he was even in Germany in the 20's before the depression hit).
It was not Hitler that caused the events of the 1940's. All of the dominos were in place, ready to fall. If these dominos had not been knocked over by Hitler, they would have been knocked over by someone else. Who is to say that if the events of WWII were not precipitated by Hitler at that time, and the dominos were left standing for just a few more years, that the resulting war would not have been even worse?
We know that Germany was pursuing the theory of nuclear fission in the 1930's. Suppose the World War was delayed by Hitler's death. Delayed long enough that Germany was able to develop a nuclear device. What then?
What if the first primitive nuclear bombs had not been used at the time they were used, demonstrating to all the world the horrors of nuclear war? MacArthur wanted to use a "tactical" nuclear device against China in the Korean war. Were it not for graphic memories of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, would American politicians have said no? Millions more lives might have been lost.
What about the people who died during Germany's racial Haulocaust? Everybody who is born onto this earth must surely die. Those people just had the misfortune of dying during a particularly tumultuous geopolitical event. But does it mean the world would have been better off if these events were delayed, or did not happen at all? Perhaps in the millions of people Hitler killed there was another young would-be dictator who would have killed even more people than Hitler.
If I were going to murder Hitler, I would be playing God. That silly little man did not single-handedly plunge the world into a decade of turmoil: the world was ready for the events of the 1940s.
I don't know about anybody else, but I think things turned out pretty well for us. There are a hell of a lot of ways that things could have turned out worse, that's for sure! Who is to say that in some twisted way, Hitler's evil did not teach the world something it need to learn, at a time it needed to be taught?
yeah, sure. Wait, who was the artist again?
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Law Questions and Answers: