Would You Kill To Change History?

T

The Abyss

Guest
#1
OKay, let's say you could time travel. Would you go back in time to kill a evil person from doing evil?

If no, then post no.

If yes, post who, why,a nd how it would affect history.

I say yes.

I would kill Hitler right after his birth so that way he couldn't even have a chance to kill any jewish people. I have a feeling that this would not extend the German empire, and perhaps have WWII never happen, but bring on a faster Cold War.
 
#2
OKay, let's say you could time travel. Would you go back in time to kill a evil person from doing evil?

If no, then post no.

If yes, post who, why,a nd how it would affect history.

I say yes.

I would kill Hitler right after his birth so that way he couldn't even have a chance to kill any jewish people. I have a feeling that this would not extend the German empire, and perhaps have WWII never happen, but bring on a faster Cold War.
I understand where your comming from but you also have to understand that if you kill Hitler then there will still be someone else that would have done the same things. You see I say no because without people making mistake we cannot learn from there mistakes and our own.
 
D

deltabtry

Guest
#3
No, you don't change a thing, because it may effect something in the future that could have been a great person, discovery etc. Destiny is predetermined by powers beyond our own.
 

breathilizer

Resident Ass-Kisser
#4
First of all, hats off to deltabtry. As an artilleryman myself, I know he has a hard fucking job.

But to he point, I'd kill no one. However, to put a twist on the concept, I'd save JFK.
 
D

deltabtry

Guest
#5
First of all, hats off to deltabtry. As an artilleryman myself, I know he has a hard fucking job.

But to he point, I'd kill no one. However, to put a twist on the concept, I'd save JFK.
High five, and Semper Fi brother, nice to know I am not alone. I also would agree with your post, JFK last of the true democrat.
 

Kazmarov

For a Free Scotland
#7
I think that killing Hitler could have a hell of a lot of negative effects. A lot of important figures only suceeded because they fled Nazi persecution, and one could argue that WW2 was the device that started the liberating (though quagmirish) decolonization process. Plus there'd be no Israel, and who knows what else.
 
T

The Abyss

Guest
#9
Thanks for your imput.

and when i wrote HItler,i was also thinking that no matter what, there would always be a worse dictator. Perhaps maybe even Rummel could've taken over as a "new hitler".

Also, breathilizer has the right idea. Also you can save a person.

and no more armed forces branches bashing :p
 
D

deltabtry

Guest
#10
Thanks for your imput.

and when i wrote HItler,i was also thinking that no matter what, there would always be a worse dictator. Perhaps maybe even Rummel could've taken over as a "new hitler".

Also, breathilizer has the right idea. Also you can save a person.

and no more armed forces branches bashing :p
Rommel despised Hitler, and also realized the war was lost before it began. Rommel was a excellent field commander and a general to his men. He also despised the Nazi party, along with many other generals(despising Hitler as well) in the German military at the time.

In short Rommel would have made a excellent replacement for Hitler, he would have shorten the war by at least three years and free the Jews, along with incarcerating Hitler and the Nazi party.