shakran

Yes but what that means is that such comparisons are not generally meaningful. After all, Hitler and Bush both used limos to get around. Doesn't have anything to do with whether Bush will do what Hitler did.

What you're missing in your attempt to cast Bush as a potential Hitler is that Bush could never be Hitler. Ever. He simply doesn't have the brains. Psychopathic as he was, Hitler was very intelligent. HE orchestrated his rise to power. Once there, HE made the decisions. Bush simply isn't smart enough for a repeat performance. Others got him there, others are making the decisions for him.

Hitler had a plan and an agenda and figured out how to accomplish it, and went and did it. He started young, was successful at just about everything he put his mind to, and did EXTREMELY well in getting the germans to trust him, at least until the point where he had enough power that public trust no longer mattered.

Bush was a ne'er-do-well playboy until his 40's. An upward failure. Every business he touched failed. He failed as governor of Texas. And he's now failing obviously as the president - and he does not have nearly the military backing to subdue the people at this point.

And to say that Bush compares to Hitler insinuates that Bush intends to wipe out some race or religion. Bush doesn't have such clarity in any of his plans.

We have to remember that this is a president who doesn't watch the news, doesn't read the newspapers, and rarely reads books. He does not like to be educated. He does not like to think. It's very difficult to form a master genocide strategy if you don't like thinking. In fact as we've seen Bush tackles one step at a time without thinking or perhaps even realizing that there will be steps beyond the one he's on. He pushed for the Iraq war without considering what would happen once we invaded. It's obvious he never considered how we'd get out of Iraq.

Frankly, Hitler was a far more competently evil leader than Bush could ever be. Comparisons between the two are crazy.

And that's even assuming Bush wants to be evil, which I do not necessarilly believe - I think it's far more likely that his evil advisors Cheney and Rumsfeld are using Bush as a puppet.


And comparing the invasion of Iraq to the invasion of Afghanistan is like comparing apples and aardvarks. They're not even in the same ballpark. Afghanistan was harboring the group that attacked us. We told them to give Al Qaeda up. They refused. They deserved to go down.

Iraq hadn't done anything to us and wasn't harboring Al Qaeda, and didn't have the capability to hurt us even if they planned to. Afghanistan was justified. Iraq was mugging and murder on a grand scale.