The Student Room Group

Prince Charles compares Putin to Hitler?

Scroll to see replies

Original post by DaveSmith99
Nope, but I don't think you have to be to realise that comparing world leaders to Hitler is not smiling and waving.


He life and work isn't restricted to just smiling and waving.
Original post by thunder_chunky
He life and work isn't restricted to just smiling and waving.


I know Charles like to think of himself as a bit of a politician, but that's not the role of a ceremonial monarchy.
Original post by thunder_chunky
He life and work isn't restricted to just smiling and waving.


So you want uncountable rulers to get involved in decision making? That can only be good for us.
His sons say more sensible stuff than he does. And he cheated on fit/late Di with Camilla lulz.....
Original post by DaveSmith99
These weren't factory workers reluctantly joining the party through cohesion. These were often people who were close to the Nazi leadership, people who would have been aware of what was going on and had the resources to leave as well as family dotted around Europe.


So why did Günther von Reibnitz join the party then, if he was clearly so opposed to it, if not under duress? Pressure to join the party didn't just affect the working class.

And no, they were not often 'aware', any more than Neville Chamberlain was aware before the war. You're talking out of your rear.

Of course not, my main objection is that Charles likes to see himself as a bit of a politician.


No he doesn't. And his comments the other day do not violate his impartiality. The point is he has to avoid party political comments. Beyond that he has every entitlement to say his piece as you or I do.

Not really, he was jailed for leading an armed coup in the 20's, he had violent paramilitary groups in the 20's and 30's, he murdered or banned all of his political opponents in the early 30's, by 33 he had established his oppressive and absolute dictatorship. Mein Kampf was written and published in the 20's where he talks about world domination, ethnic cleansing and executing the weak.


And yet plenty of people on all sides of the spectrum felt that Mein Kampf was all bluster and that given Germany's poor state a firm hand was necessary. Remember 20/20 vision: people on all sides had no problems with political violence if the alternative was anarchy, and it wasn't as if the Nazis were unique in Germany at the time in having paramilitaries terrorising the streets. If it was as obvious as you say, then the world would have isolated Germany soon after - instead nearly every country tried to engage right up to September 1939.

Anyway, I'm failing to see what this has to do with Prince Charles.

I don't know all that much about this, but as I understood it he just favoured appeasement and didn't see victory as a possibility.


From Wikipedia:

When Klemmer returned from a trip to Germany and reported the pattern of vandalism and assaults on Jews by Nazis, Kennedy responded, "Well, they brought it on themselves."

Kennedy's main concern with such violent acts against German Jews as Kristallnacht was that they generated bad publicity in the West for the Nazi regime, a concern that he communicated in a letter to Charles Lindbergh.


I didn't say he was a Nazi sympathiser, just that when you've been pictured being Nazi saluted at a Nazi funeral with a load of SS and have numerous direct links to Nazi officers, you probably shouldn't be walking around pointing out how like Nazi's other people are.


That's not Charles, genius. Anyway, I disagree.
Reply 25
Original post by James222
when the queen dies we should get rid of the royal family

I think if Charles continues as he is like this, then Britain will soon become a republic. If Charles wishes to continue to make statements like this, when he has been elected by no one, he should stand for election like the rest of us have to.
If Putin is Hitler, then I guess that makes Obama Chamberlain

Original post by Jacob-C
I think if Charles continues as he is like this, then Britain will soon become a republic. If Charles wishes to continue to make statements like this, when he has been elected by no one, he should stand for election like the rest of us have to.


I want Britain to become a Republic, but he is right

His government oppresses gays, minorities, political opponents and now he has invaded a weaker neighboring country...

In fact, these comments were made in private, he is allowed to hold opinions surely? :curious:
Original post by DaveSmith99
I know Charles like to think of himself as a bit of a politician, but that's not the role of a ceremonial monarchy.


I don't agree with him voicing his opinion so publicly on such a subject simply because it could further strain diplomatic relationships, but of course he has every right to do so.

Original post by ChaoticButterfly
So you want uncountable rulers to get involved in decision making? That can only be good for us.


Err no that isn't what I said at all.
Original post by carlisomes
His sons say more sensible stuff than he does. And he cheated on fit/late Di with Camilla lulz.....


Camilla was quite good looking when she was younger.
Reply 29
I don't see what the differnce between Russia going into Crimea/Ukraine
&
America/UK going into Iraq
Reply 30
Original post by yo radical one
In fact, these comments were made in private, he is allowed to hold opinions surely? :curious:

Of course he is entitled to opinions, in private. These comments were not in private. The monarchy should remain neutral and support the government, not the other way round or get involved in international diplomacy; the only time this being allowed is with the government's approval.
Original post by Jacob-C
Of course he is entitled to opinions, in private. These comments were not in private. The monarchy should remain neutral and support the government, not the other way round or get involved in international diplomacy; the only time this being allowed is with the government's approval.


Yeah they were

some journalist dropped him in it

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending