Posted on 07/20/2014 10:25:50 AM PDT by WXRGina
Partly true, but those English rights still were subservient to the king. American political theory broke with that by inverting the relationship of power completely through the doctrine of negative rights, which served to intrinsically negate royal sovereignty altogether.
It was probably better that Hitler wasn’t killed, he was such an incompetent military strategist. The one who was killed, and had he lived might have actually lead the third reich to victory, was Reinhard Heydrich. He was a brilliant and evil man who was considered the next ruler of the third reich but fortunately was assassinated by a British trained team of Czechs. I highly recommend the book, Hitler’s Hangman, for a great read on Heydrich.
He did. Where are they now? How many Divisions do they have?
Mussolini championed Fascism, to which Hitler added German nationalism. Woodrow Wilson and the Progressives — the people we now call Liberals — were quite enamored of the Fascists, considered them to be the embodiment of scientific Progressivism and worthy of emulation.
A good accounting of this can be found In Jonah Goldberg's book, Liberal Fascism.
Isn’t he living in a Swiss chalet along with JFK and Elvis?
That honor (percentage of population killed) would have to go to the Reverend Jones.
Why should they? He never held power and never did anything much after publishing his book.
Under the protection of Satan.....
My thought exactly.
“Partly true, but those English rights still were subservient to the king.”
Kirk considered that view to be an innovation by King George which the colonials were reacting against. There were no American representatives sitting in Parliament to vote on the taxes George III was imposing.
American colonials already had long experience with self government in their local affairs. They were content to remain loyal British subjects until King George began violating their rights as Englishmen.
The American Revolution produced no radical social changes, it produced political independence and solidified self government. By contrast the French Revolution was a radical revolution, it involved a war against traditional French society, culture, and religion in addition to political change.
>>Men do see the future but people like you do not believe them. You made my point.
Not because I’m a sheeple. Its because I am a Christian and I understand the nature of prophecy in this age. No one “sees” the future in this age. Show me someone who does see the future in a real vision and not in obscure quatrains or poetic visions. Someone who can give enough detail to convict and doesn’t make a 1000 predictions a year with a few coming true. Would YOU kill a person based on the visions of one of these people?
In terms of total numbers, not even close.
Bookmark.
A couple of opinions:
If Von Stauffenburg had just thought to have placed the unarmed 2nd charge in the briefcase with the armed 1st charge, it would have detonated and surely killed Hitler and probably every other officer in the room.
If Hitler HAD been killed on 7-20-44, I think the new German Commanders would have sued for peace immediately. They knew it was all over. They would most likely have had to go ahead and settle for unconditional surrender, it may have taken a couple of months to effect, but think of the millions of lives and destruction that would have been spared.
I think you're probably right.......
It's fun to sit back and wonder "what if".....I'm a firm believer that events are pre-ordained and if we had access to a time machine, no matter what tyrant may be taken out during their time, another one would simply assume the spot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.