grizzy Kansas
10/21/14 7:19 pm
If it wasn't for his presidency or the American revolution, or his involvement in American government, would you say George Washington wasn't historically significant? You can take away defining moments of a person and spin it any way you want.
WilliamHeins
10/21/14 9:45 am
Hitler brought Germany out of an extreme depression in just three years he turned it into one of the richest countries during that time.
jab87
10/21/14 9:18 am
He was a terrible person but that doesn't mean your not a good leader. People did follow him so that means he had good leadership qualities. Problem is he used them for evil
BadUsername
10/21/14 7:29 am
There's no denying he was a "good leader". The things he did were terrible but remember that he had millions of people that followed him.
Odysseus We All Need A Fantasy
10/21/14 7:11 am
I think Hitler, Churchill, Stalin and FDR all tapped into what the people were looking for at that time. Hitler knew the German people. He was a dynamic speaker and he gave them a scapegoat to turn their hatred towards. He understood his audience.
madeit Houston Area
10/21/14 7:04 am
Good at what? Thus is why we need to stare at evil in the face in all its forms and boldly call it what it is, because if we rationalize poor behavior and blow it off as acceptable, we will soon come to be led by monsters like him.
mac Oregon
10/21/14 6:05 am
A violent self serving prejudice bully-eventually the evil and human weakness with prevail in a dictator and ruin will come-if pre 1936 Germany continued- history could be different- the man couldn't resist acting the monster he was.
l1f2
10/21/14 3:50 am
There was a reason Hitler was on the front of a Time magazine cover, because he was a phenomenal leader. The world watched as he resurrected an economically defunct and demoralized Germany to a global force. He inspired his people and lead well.
gamerguy217
10/21/14 1:19 am
He did a fantastic job leading his people out of a depression many times worse than the American Great Depression. And at the same time he unified his people.
Bad mad. Great leader.
brenstal Florida
10/21/14 1:18 am
Even if he didn't have a war and genocide, he still would have been a bad leader. He killed a lot of acedemics, he killed disabled people, and he alienated/encouraged violence against Jews. I don't think his divisive tactics are sustainable.
Praetorianus Fair enough.
10/20/14 9:04 pm
Until 1939 probably but it wouldn't have changed the outcome of the war he started, and it's still failure. Even if he had won, he'd be just feared and mostly hated, like Stalin who did win.
Tariq88 Utah
10/20/14 7:41 pm
He was a very good speaker and good at convincing people, but it wasn't for the sake of them or for their rights and benefits, so because of that I would say no.
Comments: Add Comment