Published: Friday, March 7 2014 10:10 a.m. MST
I think this author has an ax to grind with Hillary. Is he worried she might win
in 2016? I think so.
Of course, Putin's language about "protecting" ethnic Russians from
non-existent threats is precisely analogous to Hitler's language about
"protecting" Germans from the innocuous Czechs and Poles as he proceeded
to take over their countries. Hillary's statement is just common knowledge.
Hitler and NAZI analogies pop up on these posts all the time. Of course, the
"Hitler" being referred to is almost always Obama. Surely DN allows
Hitler comparisons from everyone as long as a civil dialogue is maintained.
So Clinton says everyone wants to tone down the rhetoric and then she compares
Putin to Hitler? Thats not exactly towning down the rhetoric.
The similar acts of aggression are not enough for a comparison. Hillary is
posturing for the coming election, but she's not advocating that we go to
war as we did against Hitler. With the coming election in mind, anything a
candidate says (this will be the most transparent administration, I will cut the
deficit in half, the WH will not be run by lobbyists, I will restore US
credibility and other nations will like us, ad nauseum) must be taken with a
grain of salt. Mr. Obama's classic line "After the election I will have
more flexibility," summarizes politics, e.g. don't listen to anything
in the campaign because they have no value after the election.
Clearly a case of the pot calling the kettle black. She should speak so highly
of her husband's continuous deceit and deception. Elect Hillary president
and she will grow a Hitler mustache and walk the goose step faster than you can
shake a stick.
The Soviet Union lost 20 million people to Hitler. What Clinton said was
offensive. Don't go shooting off your mouth. As a Democrat, it is easy for
her to demonize people that she disagrees with. But this time, it isn't
some GOP congressman. There could be some ugly repercussions.
Comparing every strongman dictator to Hitler has become knee jerk reaction to an
invasion or an atrocity in some far off region on the map. How many times have
we heard it? The roll call includes Noriega, Saddam Hussein, Milosevic, Kim Jong
Ill, Qaddafi, Assad, etc. It’s just not helpful to make every single one
of them into the latest incarnation of Der Fuhrer. It’s become so
predictable that it doesn’t mean anything anymore.
"What difference does it make?" said Hillary. I think we all know that
Hillary isn't the brightest leader in the world. Putin isn't that
great either. The thing with Putin is his ability to exert control and
influence of several million Russians and hijack that government to build his
empire. Or one could argue that Obamas inability to be a real leader of the
world, makes it easier for Putin, Kim Jong Un, Pakistan, Iran etc to spread
their power and influence.No doubt whatever happens, there will be
problems down the road. Same issues we as human beings have had since we came to
earth. Fight over land, territory, resources, ideas, government, money etc.
None of that will change until each person changes their ways.
Hitler was fascist. Putin is communist. They are actually quite different and
Hillary's comparison is wrong.What this is is Hillary (a
liberal) attempting to paint Putin as conservative, which he is not. She is
trying to distance Putin from her own political ideology. But the truth is
their ideologies are very much the same. I'm not saying Hillary is going
to invade another country - Putin is clearly less calculated than Hillary - but
their viewpoints are remarkably similar.
I think Putin likes what he sees in North Korea - the worship of Kin Jung Uhn.
No, there are similarities with regards to the argument put out by Russia with
regards to Crimea but there's enough differences overall that it's not
particularly helpful to suggest a comparison (not that it particularly matters
much of course since she's not Secretary of State right now).
Hey Sir Robin - Putin is NOT a Communist.The Soviet Union is
dead.Putin is a nationalist, and a corporatist, who (although he may
sometimes publicly express a distrust of capitalism) supports and is supported
by major oligarchic capitalists.. . . Just Like Hitler was.
Simply said no. Craig Clark says it well."It’s just not
helpful to make every single one of them into the latest incarnation of Der
Fuhrer. It’s become so predictable that it doesn’t mean anything
anymore." So I would add, just please stop with the Hitler
comparisons on both sides. I would also add that Hillary could regret saying
this if she finds herself President and having to deal with Putin face to face.
Not too smart. However..it really takes a ton of gaul for the DN to
print an article asking this question about Hillary when the right has compared
such actions as delaying an ACA deadline to Hitler like dictates.
Liberal Ted . . . Hillary is a whole lot more intelligent than anything the
Republicans have been able to produce lately.If you think Hillary is
stupid, then how do you rate GW Bush? And what's this about
Obama's " inability to be a real leader of the world?" Obama enjoys
much more international respect than GW ever did.It is only American
Right Wingers in their closed little world who share that negative opinion of
I've heard the US using the same excuse "protecting our people and
interests in the region" to send troops overseas. Insulting a
person is not the way to open a dialog. Hillary has been spending to much time
on social media sites.
Godwin's Law. Don't compare people to Hitler. It's always
facile, and always wrong.
Comparing Putin to Hitler is spot on when remembering what Hitter did in the
late 30s. And since she is making that comparison, is she also comparing Obama
to Chamberlain?Food for thought
People compare Obama to Hitler every day in these comments. I can't see
Clinton's use of the comparison suddenly offends people.Craig
Clark hits the nail on the head. Comparisons to Hitler have become so overused
and thus diluted that it's lost its meaning.
Hitler seized the Sudetenland to start a war. Hitler felt that he FAILED at the
Munich Conference. Putin is a nationalist, but I don't think he
is trying to start WWIII. But looking at Russian history over the last 200
years, Russia is NOT going to back away from Crimea. They have military bases
there, they have a right to keep troops there (through a treaty with the
legally-elected Ukrainian governmnet) and they have a historical/nationalist
argument of a political and cultural relationship with the region for two
centuries. If the people of Crimea want to confederate with Russia,
who really has the right to stop them? Does the United States and European Union
really want to sacrifice life and treasure to bolster up the Ukrainian
government and economy? To what ends?
DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.— About comments