because you refuse to look at things in a factual context? good riddance if thats the case. its like saying someone was always a killer because they killed someone after being put in prison regardless of the fact they only went to prison for illegal gambling that hurt no one.

its obvious you have no basic understanding of psychology so have fun being ignorant of how things really work.

No.
I'm done here because you obviously don't understand my argument.
What you said has absolutely nothing to do with my argument.

you're argument is that no matter the circumstances in his life he was always a killer. you aren't accounting for the fact he lived in a terrible time and he was surrounded by terrible people. look at the witness stories from auschwitz and there are people saying he was very nice and basically saved their lives to people saying he was pretty much a cold blooded killer. he obviously had mental issues that manifested once being put in the situation he was in.

This statement actually proves you don't understand my argument.

When he actually posts something related to my argument, could someone PM me? Thanks.

PS
When he first came to Auschwitz he found 600 women in only 180 beds and gassed all of them because they had lice and typhus.
Yes, he was very nice.

it would of been better to let them die from it naturally and infect more people to die from it before then right? that was the most reasonable thing to do sadly.

his first action you bring up you claim to be a bad thing when in reality it probably saved more lives than it took. as a doctor he was forced to make a hard choice for the greater good.

Wow.
Never thought I'd see the day.

Actually, more sources say it was one block that had lice, and he sent the whole dormitory to be gassed.
How about this one?

The Angel of Death fed his legend by dramatizing murderous policies, such as his drawing a line on the wall of the children's block between 150 and 156 centimeters (about 5 feet or 5 feet 2 inches) from the floor.Then sending those whose heads could not reach the line to the gas chamber ... (Lifton, p. 346.)

again as a doctor he was forced to make that kind of decision since body lice spread disease. keep in mind this was not a hospital but a labor camp where he was tasked with keeping the working population as healthy as possible.

honestly considering that before that policy all children were sent to the gas chambers it would look like he saved lives. again a bad situation all around but at least not every last child was killed because of him.

i'm not pretending this was an ideal situation but there are times where you have to kill to save and auschwitz was full of those times. he had two sides to him as many witnesses will say.

Holy shit.
You have to be trolling me.
Do you have any idea of what they thought of the people in the camp?
Seriously?
No, you can't be serious. Hell no.

I'm done with this ignorant fool.

This post was edited by Boogersnot308 on Jun 11 2011 09:58pm

i'm not concerned with what "they" thought but this individual thought. you are trying to make him out to be a villain when all he had was hard choices. if you are told you have to kill your mother or your father or they both die no matter what its going to end badly.

No.