Can Dictators Rise Again in Europe?

[Ya)\/(I-YuGI]

I have been asking this question to my self... could another hitler,mussolini, take power again in europe and start another war.hmmmm, is the u.s doing anything to stop dictatorship?( i think they did cold war but that didnt really put an end to it)
so do ya think dictator can and will rise in europe again?

[Boba Fett]

[COLOR=green]Your post subject asks "Can [I]Bad[/I] Dictators rise again in Europe." How often do you get a [I]good[/I] Dictator? :drunk:

As for whether or not another dictator could take control of Europe or one of its countries, yes it could happen. However it wouldn't be likely that the rest of the world community would stand by and let a power hungry idiot take control of a country by force. Any dictator who wants to rise to power in a civilized country will have to be elected.

That very well could happen; after all there was that French wacko who got pretty far in the last French election.

It's ultimately up to the European people to make the right choices and protect their freedoms...[/COLOR]

[Gavin]

[color=teal]I severly doubt that, with the current E.U. admisistration in place, it makes it very hard for dictators to come to power, the last one to cause sweat to break was Jean Marie LaPenn, because he was very facist, but his popularity has declined, the most dangerous places are now in Africa with people like Robert Mugabe(sp)
who are facists and could start a war[/color]

[Sui Generis]

Depends do you consider Russia Europe? (Its early)

Anything is possible, and I could see a dictator rising up in some countries. I'm sure its going to happen again for history repeats itself. The all mighty Rome had a government similar to ours and was sure that noone would ever become a true dictator again yet they were over run by Barbarians, and dictators rules the world for centuries.

But, yes its really up to the people in Europe to stop this.


If Russia is counted as Europe I can see a Czar (basically a dictator) rising up again. There are several groups who support this and are trying to get a Czar. And in all actuality untill the last couple of Czar's Russia was ran beautifully by them. SO yes there are some good dictators.

[Kent]

I dont really know, its quite possible because socialism is really big over there.

Plus the muslim party took over peacefully in turkey, and they are gonna be part of nato and the eu in another year or so.

So I would say theres a descent possibility.

[Solo Tremaine]

I don't think it'd happen so much in Western Europe. but all you need to look at is Eastern Europe and you've got hundreds of potential dictators.

I wouldn't say Russia was run 'beautifully'- the last Czar (Nicholas II) was incompetant and too easily influenced by his aides. Rasputin was the most famous case- he 'enchanted' them by supposedly curing his son's haemophilia, and became a really powerful influence over him. The people didn't like him because he was too distant from them and more or less told them what they wanted. Not that good.

People are so much more aware of these things now. They have so much more power to stop potential Nazis from coming into Government. About 100 years ago, everything was very much based on the aristocracy and money. You were born into government, you weren't elected. And even in the 30's when Hitler came to power things were so bad they couldn't see how manipulative he was. But he did bring Germany back economically and militarily. It was the French and British policies of appeasement that let him get too far.

[Sandy]

I don't think Europe has any "loonies" trying to get to power, but in [i]the western continent[/i] has a pretty good candidate right now. :smirk: Cough, sorry...

I REALLY don't like what the first writer (sorry, your name is WAY too difficult!) said about "is the u.s. doing anything", beacuse that automatically assumes that USA is the GOOD guy, who will save us Europeans from any madman trying to take over. Sorry, but I highly doupt that European countries will EVER let U.S to become their "big brother". One country CANNOT rule/guard the entire world, because THAT'S dictatorship.

To MY opinion, Tony Blair is just a big suck-*** for Bush, and all the once-so-powerful countries of Europe are trembling under Bush's guarding eye. How can this be? I'm really troubled by this...:(

So, let's all just think about the dictators of the present day before we try to prophetize the coming ones, right?

(Okay, Bush isn't really a dictator -yet, but if things keep going the direction HE wants too much, then the rest of the world will have some SERIOUS problems...)

[Sui Generis]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Solo Tremaine [/i]
[B]I wouldn't say Russia was run 'beautifully'- the last Czar (Nicholas II) was incompetant and too easily influenced by his aides. Rasputin was the most famous case- he 'enchanted' them by supposedly curing his son's haemophilia, and became a really powerful influence over him. The people didn't like him because he was too distant from them and more or less told them what they wanted. Not that good.[/B]
[/QUOTE]

Just thought that I'd point out that I said "And in all actuality untill the last couple of Czar's Russia was ran beautifully by them."

Which in other words means: Czar's ran Russia very well untill around the 1850's-1860's where their rules began to become currupt and weak which lead to the Communist take over in 1918 (or was it 1916?)


[quote][i]Originally posted by Sage[/i][b] (Okay, Bush isn't really a dictator -yet, but if things keep going the direction HE wants too much, then the rest of the world will have some SERIOUS problems...)[/b][/quote]

How could you accuse Bush of being anything close to a dictator. He had the chance to be a dictator and still has the chance yet he isn't.

AFter 9-11 congress passes a bill that allowed Bush to basically do whatever he wanted, and he wouldn't have to confront anyone about it. Yet he hasn't taken full power. Instead he even talked to the legislation and congress about attacking Iraq. He could've just ordered an attack. He is acting more responsible then most presidents of the United States, so I don't see how he is even considered close to a Dictator. If you don't know they still haven't removed the bill.

[Solo Tremaine]

Sorry, Lalaith, I completely misread that. :o Duh me. Think of it as elaborating on your point.:whoops: The Bolsheviks took over in 1917 and then killed the Czar's family the next year, I think. I haven't studied this for two years, so I'm a little rusty.

I don't like the way Blair's handling things either. His 'quick-fix- policies with everything really annoy me. And I'm worried that it's going to lead to another war. Not least because I'm sitting in my study on the South Coast of England right now.

Bush wouldn't exactly be my first choice of President, either. This whole war on Iraq was a bit pre-emptive (sp?). Yeah, by all means suppress terrorist groups, but getting rid of Saddam's only going to make things worse, if it hasn't already. Because if anything, there'll be someone else just as bad waiting to take his place.

[Sandy]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Lalaith Ril [/i]
[B]
How could you accuse Bush of being anything close to a dictator. He had the chance to be a dictator and still has the chance yet he isn't.

AFter 9-11 congress passes a bill that allowed Bush to basically do whatever he wanted, and he wouldn't have to confront anyone about it. Yet he hasn't taken full power. Instead he even talked to the legislation and congress about attacking Iraq. He could've just ordered an attack. He is acting more responsible then most presidents of the United States, so I don't see how he is even considered close to a Dictator. If you don't know they still haven't removed the bill. [/B][/QUOTE]

What do you mean?! Bush has totally ignored United Nations, and is planning to attack to Iraq no matter what they do! Saddam hasn't blown up any skycrapers, but STILL he irritates Bush so much he is willing to START A WAR. War is NEVER an answer to anything; it only causes misery and pain! Why don't you Americans see that? Are you too blinded by bloodlust? Gosh, and you still ahve the nerve to say that ANY god is blessing your actions! :rolleyes:

Sorry, I'm heating up again!:blush: I didn't mean to get personal, but I just had to get this out of my chest: it isn't like I could just go and yell directly to the Bush-man...

[Justin]

Bush wants to disarm Saddam BEFORE he blows up any skyscrapers and takes any innocent lives, idiot.

If it had happened in your country, you'd be just as ready to go after the culprits--as well as anyone else who could possibly do it again.

I find it funny that anytime there's a major conflict in Europe, America's allies call for her immediate assistance, yet when America has her own conflicts to deal with, our Europian allies criticize us and sit on their lazy butts all day.

As I've said before, things would be much different if I ran this country. If that were so, you could really holler about a maniac in power.

Anyway, I don't doubt that a dictator will arise in Europe again. In fact, I'm calling it.

-Justin

[Solo Tremaine]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Justin [/i]
[B]I find it funny that anytime there's a major conflict in Europe, America's allies call for her immediate assistance, yet when America has her own conflicts to deal with, our Europian allies criticize us and sit on their lazy butts all day.[/B][/QUOTE]

It depends on the problem. Most of the ones in Europe at the moment were instigated by America, so it's only right that it should help sort it out. Besides, America's one of, if not the, most powerful nation in the world and is involved in more or less everything that goes on anyway, regardless of whether any assistance has or hasn't been asked for.

The UN is made up of a lot of nations, not just America. It might seem like America's always doing things, but it's never really alone in dealing with them. But, living in the UK, I don't know half the problems that the US does have, so I don't know how much the US actually has to deal with, so I'm not sure how true my thoughts are.

If it's an internal problem, though (as with the most recent Presedential election), then what are the allies supposed to do? Send troops over to look at each ballot form? Europe's a continent made up of lots of countries so the internal problems in Europe are actually between countries as opposed to states, and are of more global consequence if things go wrong. It's about time America started taking an interest in the rest of the world anyway. Politically, I mean.

[James]

[color=royalblue]I think some are too hard on Europe, in some circumstances. Europe isn't a single nation, as was just mentioned...so it's not quite as simple as having a unified national policy.

Europe is still massively inefficient in terms of the EU political structure...but that will change over time. Who knows, in our lifetimes, maybe "Europe" will become a nation with each country becoming a state. It has been talked about before...and some Euro-zone countries are eager to have it happen.

If Europe were to unify as one nation with many states...it would effectively become the world's second superpower. It would possibly even be larger than the United States in terms of economy and such.

I think the world needs such balance...but yeah, that's getting a bit off topic.

I don't think a dictatorship will arise in Europe for numerous reasons -- the political structure as it currently stands...and the fact that any sign of unilateralism is disregarded by Europeans generally, as they are so used to seeing dictatorships in their own history. I think it's extremely unlikely that another would rise anywhere in Europe.[/color]

[Justin]

I was speaking more in terms of a confilct with another regime. America has been criticized all over for the way it went in after the Taliban and other terrorist organizations responsible for the 9/11 tradjedy. Yet I find it unlikely that any other nation of the world(whether a part of the 'free world' or not) would handle things any differently.

People holler about our keeping the POW's from Afghanistan locked up in Cuba because it's supposedly inhuman. How many of you know that those prisoners have actually [i]gained[/i] weight since they were there?

Granted, it's not America's normal policy to strike first. But all things considered, I think it's more than justified to hit Saddam. I mean, who knows...it might not be America that he'd hit first...

As for the Europian dictator thing: I've given my opinion, and I stand beside it. If you want my reasoning, read the prophecies of Daniel in the Bible. Or better yet, just go browse through the site in my signature.

-Justin

[Sui Generis]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by sage [/i]
[B]What do you mean?! Bush has totally ignored United Nations, and is planning to attack to Iraq no matter what they do! Saddam hasn't blown up any skycrapers, but STILL he irritates Bush so much he is willing to START A WAR. War is NEVER an answer to anything; it only causes misery and pain! Why don't you Americans see that? Are you too blinded by bloodlust? Gosh, and you still ahve the nerve to say that ANY god is blessing your actions! :rolleyes:

Sorry, I'm heating up again!:blush: I didn't mean to get personal, but I just had to get this out of my chest: it isn't like I could just go and yell directly to the Bush-man... [/B][/QUOTE]

"Suddam hasn't blown up any skyscrapers." Here let me fix that sentence for you, "Suddam hasn't blown up any skyscapers YET!"

Look I'm not dissing the UN and I'm not saying our nation is better than yours, but unlike what you've shown in history America trys to stop things before they happen. You realize the US warned the U.N about Hitler? But you guys thought it was a bad idea to go to war and look what he did. Look at how costly the war become once he built up his forces! Do you want this to happen again?

America doesnt'! We've seen it happened before we've been affected by it and now we wanna stop it.

Honestly America doesn't truly have to confront the UN. But we have. We've talked to them for years about Suddam!

Americans blood thristy? We're humans yes and every human is blood thirsty but saying our country just wants to start war for the hell of it is a bunch of bull! If we were just looking for war don't you think we would've bombed his *** by now? Not to mentions North Korea, China, or Russia.

We've had opportunities to attack all these countries but for the most part we've strived to be as peaceful as possible.

America was based on rights and beliefs. Some of these rights and beliefs we have strayed from, however, we don't believe that people should live in fear. Thats one of the reasons we are trying to stop Suddam. He's just another Hitles. If he gets strong enough he's gonna just rule with an Iron Fist pushing every country around. Causing us to look behind our back every second wondering when Small Pox is gonna kill us or a nuclear warhead!

If we dont' act then we'd be the ones at fault. Ya'all need to get off your butts and help! Just because you're scared this'll be WW3 doesn't mean you need to stop! IF we wait it'll only get worse!


P.S: Sorry if I came off as a bit hostile I'm just tired of hearing America being yelled at for being the "Police Man." Yet when we lay off a bit and let someone else take the role, noone does. HUmans can't live without helping eachother out. When noone else steps up to help others why is it wrong that AMerica does?!


(Ah I'm glad that ya'all are so smart to continue a stereotype thats been around for roughly a hundred years.)

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by James [/i]
[B][color=royalblue]Europe is still massively inefficient in terms of the EU political structure...but that will change over time. Who knows, in our lifetimes, maybe "Europe" will become a nation with each country becoming a state. It has been talked about before...and some Euro-zone countries are eager to have it happen.
[/color] [/B][/QUOTE]

Yeah... all we need now is for Britain to get it's arse in gear and stop moaning about how we're seperate from europe.. (there may be other countries like that, but I don't live in them.. lol.)

[Sandy]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Lalaith Ril [/i]
[B]Honestly America doesn't truly have to confront the UN.[/b][/quote]

Oh YES you have! Don't you think a single country can act both the Police AND the King!

[quote][b]Americans blood thristy? We're humans yes and every human is blood thirsty but saying our country just wants to start war for the hell of it is a bunch of bull! If we were just looking for war don't you think we would've bombed his *** by now? Not to mentions North Korea, China, or Russia.[/b][/quote]

Well, now you have an excuse. If you've just sent your nukes, you'd have the rest of the world in your neck.

[quote][b]If we dont' act then we'd be the ones at fault. Ya'all need to get off your butts and help! Just because you're scared this'll be WW3 doesn't mean you need to stop! IF we wait it'll only get worse![/b][/quote]

War is NOT an answer! Call it an opinion, but that's how I see the world. Hostility will only bring more hostility, and soon we are all in one worldwide vicious circle of vengeance.:therock:

[quote][b]Sorry if I came off as a bit hostile I'm just tired of hearing America being yelled at for being the "Police Man." Yet when we lay off a bit and let someone else take the role, noone does. HUmans can't live without helping eachother out. When noone else steps up to help others why is it wrong that AMerica does?!
[/B][/QUOTE]

YOU are the ones who took the Police-role, YOU can only blaim YOURSELF. And I think U.S is quite happy about it's position in "peacekeeping":smirk:

[Sui Generis]

Look I'm sick if your English stereotyping. Get the facts. We arn't the freaking police, nor are we trying to be the "KING". What I was saying was that, No country honestly has to confront another on its OWN problems.

"Well, now you have an excuse. If you've just sent your nukes, you'd have the rest of the world in your neck."

I don't understand what you are trying to say there....



I don't like war either. Hell I despise it, but the simple fact is people learn their lessons different ways. Suddam is one of those people where you actually have to show force for them to learn their lesson. He's not gonna go "Hm...you know what. What I'm doing is morally wrong, and killing thousands of people isn't right." just because we threaten him.

Tell me where did we take the police role? Every single war we've entered we've been asked to enter. Hell don't you remember WW2. You guys were begging us to enter. We didn't take the role we simple helped other countries out. Is that a crime?

Now to stay on topic...PM to finish this discussion

[Sandy]

Erhm, actually Finland was on Germany's side, until it betrayed us, so WE did not ask USA to participate in ANYTHING in WW2, according to MY knowledge.

Though I'm not sure about that because we DID receive economical help from USA, but I DO know we were the only country to pay it back in it's entity.

Geez, I should've stay awake on the history classes more often...:rolleyes:

And I'm sick of arguing about things that have so much emotional stess on them... YES, I STARTED this USA-discussion, but now I'm also going to stop it. We are digging the past too much, while we should look to the future.

People can continue on the REAL topic if they wish. Boy, political topics SURE are hard!

[Dan L]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by sage [/i]
[B]And I'm sick of arguing about things that have so much emotional stess on them... YES, I STARTED this USA-discussion, but now I'm also going to stop it. We are digging the past too much, while we should look to the future.[/B][/QUOTE]

And how exactly are you supposed to look to the future without looking at the past and present, eh?

That wasn't the thing that was off-topic at all.. what was off-topic was your anti-american rantings. Yeah, Americans [i]can[/i] be really self-consumed as a country and as a people.. but then, so can we.. so can any country, the only difference is America is bigger, and therefore gets criticised by all the little countries. If England was the size of america, I doubt that we would be any different. The thing is, we're not different at all anyway.. we're just much smaller.

Someone has to play cop anyway.. if for no other reason then purely because no-one can be arsed to. Have you ever seen England actually make a gutsy decision recently?

Being a christian, I'm all for pacifism, and am thoroughly against war, so I don't really approve of dropping bombs on anyone. However, I'm also against being a coward and not doing anything in case people don't like you.

[Solo Tremaine]

Anyway, we should be getting back to the topic. *Looks back at topic. Can see it just below the horizon*

Because there's so much more freedom today, it's unlikely there'll be any dictator coming to and major power soon, unless something really catastrophic happens. As for non-major powers, well, all you need to do is look at Zimbabwe and you've got a Nazi-like dictator running a purge on people who give the country its food and income. Crazy. I said earlier that dictators aren't stupid, but maybe I was wrong...

[Bent Metal]

Yes, dictatorship will rise again and his name is Charles.

[Sandy]

:laugh: Hahahaa!!! :laugh:

Charles... Oy, that's funny!:D

"Beware all nations, I will counquer you all under my ears!" :laugh:

Erhm Bent, you WERE joking, I hope.