Turn on thread page Beta

If you could kill one person in history...? watch

  • View Poll Results: From these options?
    Hitler (or any top SS member)
    18
    21.43%
    Stalin
    7
    8.33%
    Your Grandfather (to see what would happen)
    2
    2.38%
    Jesus
    5
    5.95%
    Mohammed
    11
    13.10%
    The Maker of This Forum
    16
    19.05%
    Genghis Khan
    3
    3.57%
    Saddam Hussein
    2
    2.38%
    Osama Bin Laden
    4
    4.76%
    Mao
    4
    4.76%
    Ayatollah Khomeini
    4
    4.76%
    Walt Disney (I'm weird and hate seeing children happy)
    8
    9.52%

    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AmyAintDead)
    I'd have liked to kill the guy who killed Lee Oswald (the guy who assassinated Kennedy) as the JFK assassination still has many holes in it, and Oswald never admitted to assassinated Kennedy and it seems that Oswald had links to the Soviet Union. It possibly would have unravelled even greater tensions between the US and the Soviet Union, but it would have been fascinating to possibly find out if it truly was Oswald who assassinated Kennedy and if so, if he worked on his own or if there was a second assassin.

    **Edit**
    Chose Genghis Kahn because apparently 1 in every 200 men is a direct descendant of Genghis Kahn and possess the same Y chromosome. Thought that'd mess about with genetics a bit.
    You have a point there with the escalation of the Cold War. What with the Cuban missile crisis, I reckon Britain would somehow been involved due to US missiles here. Perhaps Kennedy's assassination was for the best - God rest his soul though
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ndella)
    You have a point there with the escalation of the Cold War. What with the Cuban missile crisis, I reckon Britain would somehow been involved due to US missiles here. Perhaps Kennedy's assassination was for the best - God rest his soul though
    Yeah, tensions were ridiculously high at the time that I'm surprised that drastic action against the Soviets wasn't taken soon after Kennedy's assassination. It's something I need to read up more. But nevertheless, thankfully no missiles or bombs were ever set off, it would have destroyed so much.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ndella)
    I picked Mohammed, but the person I would rather have killed on the list would have been the guy who assassinated Kennedy, I would have liked to know how he would have finished his domestic and foreign policies - it's a shame he couldn't.
    So rude.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    I should point that for the sake of humanity, some people should really vote for Hitler to open up the lead over the Maker of This Forum...
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by AmyAintDead)
    Yeah, tensions were ridiculously high at the time that I'm surprised that drastic action against the Soviets wasn't taken soon after Kennedy's assassination. It's something I need to read up more. But nevertheless, thankfully no missiles or bombs were ever set off, it would have destroyed so much.
    It definitely would, imagine World War III
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galileo Galilei)
    So rude.
    Like how? I don't want to get into an argument about religion since I have minimal knowledge on the practice of Islam, but I do know that Mohammed's prophecies has created a lot of preventable conflict.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ndella)
    Like how? I don't want to get into an argument about religion since I have minimal knowledge on the practice of Islam, but I do know that Mohammed's prophecies has created a lot of preventable conflict.
    So why comment and say you would kill him if you know NOTHING about the man.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Pol Pot. As evil a human being as has ever existed.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Galileo Galilei)
    So why comment and say you would kill him if you know NOTHING about the man.
    Well I have a general knowledge of him, rather than nothing. I'd say he has caused a considerable amount of disagreements. If it wasn't for him, these disagreements wouldn't exist.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Karl pilkington, I hate that little ****
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Osama Bin Laden
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ndella)
    Well I have a general knowledge of him, rather than nothing. I'd say he has caused a considerable amount of disagreements. If it wasn't for him, these disagreements wouldn't exist.
    I agree, not in your choice (I think Hitler should always be first choice) but in this comment. Way too often people are attacked for making a statement which is correct about a subject which they know relatively little about.
    I happen to know a fair amount about Islam, but I think the statement you made does not require an in-depth knowledge of the subject. Everyone knows Mohammad, or rather the religion that arose out of his prophecies and teachings caused conflict, both in history and present times
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    probably pol pot.

    first class ****
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by vendettax)
    Karl Marx
    Good call. A lot of those early liberals in general would be a good start.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elohssa)
    Good call. A lot of those early liberals in general would be a good start.
    However heartless you are, I'm not sure you'd like today without 'those early liberals'. Ultimately, they've probably bettered society; Russia's long term for example has improved.

    A lot of people really misjudge Marx, who was a theorist, not a radical leader or theologist. His dialectic covers the process by which the balance of power shifts in society, and mentions that it will happen, not that it should. In addition, Marxist theory was pretty badly adapted for a Russian society not really fitting into Marx's theories. He is a terribly misjudged character in history, and you would do well not to voice incorrect stereotypes concerning him.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DouglasAdams)
    However heartless you are, I'm not sure you'd like today without 'those early liberals'. Ultimately, they've probably bettered society; Russia's long term for example has improved.

    A lot of people really misjudge Marx, who was a theorist, not a radical leader or theologist. His dialectic covers the process by which the balance of power shifts in society, and mentions that it will happen, not that it should. In addition, Marxist theory was pretty badly adapted for a Russian society not really fitting into Marx's theories. He is a terribly misjudged character in history, and you would do well not to voice incorrect stereotypes concerning him.
    Russia was completely screwed over by Marxism. It's the sole reason why most of E.Europe is behind the west economically. Up to 7.5 million Ukrainians died in the Holodomor and many more perished during communism. Maxism is evil as it promotes the idea that everyone is inherently good and that if something feels good, it must be true - regardless of scientific evidence. It has plagued E.Europe and now the West is beginning to really suffer from its re-emergence.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by elohssa)
    Russia was completely screwed over by Marxism. It's the sole reason why most of E.Europe is behind the west economically. Up to 7.5 million Ukrainians died in the Holodomor and many more perished during communism. Maxism is evil as it promotes the idea that everyone is inherently good and that if something feels good, it must be true - regardless of scientific evidence. It has plagued E.Europe and now the West is beginning to really suffer from its re-emergence.
    You have to be kidding me; if not for Marxism it is possible that Russia would still be a Tsarist autocracy. And look at the levels of Russia's economic output before the end of Tsarism, and later after its fall. Communism was perhaps not the best society, but there was certainly greater overall economic growth under Stalin and Lenin than the extremely limited reforms under Tsarism.
    And Marxism does not promote the idea that everyone is good; on the contrary revolution occurs. The proletariat eventually become the new ruling classes, and certainly ruthless to the old ruling classes originally.

    And as I said, Marxism did not fit Russian society! It was adapted for Russia as an excuse for revolution.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DouglasAdams)
    You have to be kidding me; if not for Marxism it is possible that Russia would still be a Tsarist autocracy. And look at the levels of Russia's economic output before the end of Tsarism, and later after its fall. Communism was perhaps not the best society, but there was certainly greater overall economic growth under Stalin and Lenin than the extremely limited reforms under Tsarism.
    And Marxism does not promote the idea that everyone is good; on the contrary revolution occurs. The proletariat eventually become the new ruling classes, and certainly ruthless to the old ruling classes originally.

    And as I said, Marxism did not fit Russian society! It was adapted for Russia as an excuse for revolution.
    The monarchy would have definitely fallen and Russia (some of the nobility even refused to speak Russian and spoke French; there is no way they would have lasted) would have become a capitalistic western country (after a nationalist revolution) and would have been much wealthier for it (and E.Europe in general). There is nothing good about any form of communism, "pure" or not. Pure communism emphasises "to each according to his ability, from each according to his need" - when would that ever work?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DouglasAdams)
    Who would it be?
    Probably you....
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Well all of those people are already dead, so it would have to be the maker of this forum.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: November 22, 2013
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources
AtCTs

Ask the Community Team

Got a question about the site content or our moderation? Ask here.

Welcome Lounge

Welcome Lounge

We're a friendly bunch. Post here if you're new to TSR.

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.