One STD to rule them all (1046 hits)
Category: NoneRating: 1 on 6 reviews (Rate this item) (V)
Submitted by Ess2s2 (View user info) at 2004-03-12 19:34:52 EST
Who here knows Adolf Hitler?
I don't mean personally, I'm just asking if you've ever heard of the guy. Chances are you have. Most people have considering he was one of the greatest tyrants to ever live.
Okay, when I say "greatest", I don't mean it like he was a super guy, I mean he was really good at being an asshole. Strange how Hitler and my boss share so much in common.
Well the other day, I was contemplating a conversation I had had with one of my good buddies not too long ago about the different things that made Hitler who he was. Rumor has it that a goat bit his genitalia when he was a child, and so, years later, the entire world has to suffer, talk about having little-man syndrome...
The focus of this particular vein of conversation revolved around the speculation of what Hitler would have been like if he was suffering from a terminal disease and knew it. In this instance, we used AIDS just so we could bring the goat biting incident back into play, even if only for a humorous departure from reality. Although I maintained that goats could very well carry the HIV virus in their saliva had they recently had sex with an AIDS infected monkey.
It's not too far off the mark if you consider some of the crazy *shit* they do in Germany.
But I digress. The debate went something like this: Would Adolf Hitler, the most well known tyrant of the 20th century, and the greatest mass murderer that ever lived, be more tyrannical or less tyrannical as a result of his infection with a terminal disease?
Okay, when I say "greatest" mass murderer I mean-- Er, never mind...
During the course of the conversation, I held the belief that Hitler would be more of a tyrant and even more hell-bent on world domination since he had to act fast before he died.
My buddy maintained that Hitler would be either less of a threat or no threat at all due to his deteriorating condition.
"You are a fucking moron." was one of the tactful ways that I supported my side of the argument.
The fact that Hitler was dying of a disease; in this instance AIDS, that was uncurable would only drive him further to the point of megalomaniacal rage and power hungry insanity. He would invariably push his armies farther, create larger stockpiles of supplies and weapons, and push all his force to the forefront, effectively winning the war.
"You pull these facts out of you ass do you?" My friend countered.
Hitler dying of an incurable disease would destroy his resolve, not invigorate it, and knowing he would never see the light of his plan would ultimately doom him to failure, if he ever tried enacting it at all. If he had the AIDS virus before he rose to power, he would undoubtedly be just another obscure liutenant dying of some trivial secondary disease. His body and name would fall into the mists of time and be forgotten. If he happened to "catch" it after he became the political and military leader he is so well known for, one of his aides (no pun intended) would have no doubt taken advantage of his weakened state and usurped him from power.
So, as I got to thinking I thought "Who better to toss this discussion to than the workplace lions of Ubersite!!"
So what about it Uber? Hitler with AIDS, cuddly as a kitten with acute pneumonia, or tough and painful as a coffin nail?
User Reviews
Submitted by lojope (user info) at 2004-04-28 16:03:29 EDT (#)
Ranking: 2
Actually, Hitler's plans would have probably stayed exactly the same. Hitler was trying to create a perfect race. He deemed those of Arian descent to be perfect. Hitler was not of Arian descent. Had he succeeded in his plans, the culmination of his rule would have been by his own suicide. His death was part of the plan all along. A disease that would have killed him wouldn't have changed anything but the method of his demise.
Also, Mussilini was actually worse than Hitler. He killed more people. The only difference was he was not trying to obliterate an entire race, just killing his own people at his whim. Hitler just got more fame.
Not to say that Hitler was a good guy or anything, cause obviously he sucked too. :o)
Submitted by Herpes (user info) at 2004-03-13 03:48:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
You should have used Herpes as an example.
Herpes 0wNz j00!
Submitted by ess2s2 (user info) at 2004-03-12 22:26:26 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
While what you say is true, I don't think Hitler would allow such information to get any farther than his most trusted assistants. If he even allowed them to know such things. Usually, leaders only allow their successors to know of their weakness and possibility of dying.
If Hitler played true to form, he would have kept the disease close to his chest and plowed relentlessly through the enemy, knowing full well that any conquests he made would only be paving the way for a possible successor who would undoubtedly honor him after his death as a visionary.
Thus, the disease would cause him to fight harder.
Submitted by Random Joe at 2004-03-12 20:09:31 EST (#)
Ranking: 1
If Hitler's followers knew that he had "AIDS", would not his followers be less likely to follow his orders with such obedience since he could be viewed as inferior for being infected with a life-threatening disease. Then, it would affect his superior race stance, since he is dying from some disease. Who would follow that out of fear of someone who is eventually going to just windle down to death? A lot of people followed him out of fear and assuming that he might not go away for a long time.
Submitted by ess2s2 (user info) at 2004-03-12 19:45:03 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
I know AIDS didn't exist back then, but my friend and I used it as an example. Any terminal disease would have worked, but we thought it was sort of interesting to use a sexually transmitted disease just for the sake of argument. I figured Hitler would be PISSED if he found out some Jewish girl gave him an STD. It would at least give an explination (however unrealistic) as to why he held such a hatred towards Jews.
Submitted by DarthAwesome (user info) at 2004-03-12 19:40:09 EST (#)
Ranking: 0
you can't get AIDs without HIV, so he'd easily have enough time to fight world war two considering the amount of time it takes to contract full blown AIDs. I tend to agree with you, except for the fact that HIV didn't exist back then...