Who would you vote for? *Intellectuals only*

You clearly didn't read my whole post.
I do agree with the idea that he did was HE saw right.
I don't agree with the idea itself.

 

I would have to go with Hitler. Despite trying to take over the world and killing 6 million Jews, he brought Germany up from the depression in which they were in. Had he not done the evil things he did, I can only assume Germany would be a top nation, hand in hand with the United States (before all the debts and economic crisis)

 

Does it matter? With the inhumane experiments hitler conducted on the Jewish people, his task force was able to pioneer the Human Genome Project and many other genetic sciences that has helped hundreds of millions of people since. His acts may have been abhorral and his core motivations; evil, but that doesn't diminish his ability and aptitude for science and leadership alike. If, like the OP said, there was a way to have hitler as leader without evoking another genocide, he's the most logical choice.

 

This exactly. When I said killing them was right, for him, I didn't mean I feel it is correct morally what he did, and I don't agree with it at all, but he did what HE felt was right, and progressed the country very far in a very short timeframe. He was a brilliant speaker, and motivator and pulled the country out of a huge depression. I think @hall0ween didn't quite understand what I meant.

 

Hitler. Hitler's main problem was an inability to manage his forces efficiently enough
One of the main reasons Germany got pwned is simply because they took to much time making each aircraft / tank perfect compared to the Russians and Americans who had mastered the art of manufacturing and were able to make lots of low quality aircraft very quickly (for those of you who play SC2, think of it as a Zerg vs. Protoss thing).

In addition, Germany was using up a significant portion of their resources keeping Jews alive. The minimum recommended caloric intake for women is 1200 calories daily, with so little food, any human being would be hungry all day. Lets reduce this to 1000 calories daily for cruelty's sake. At modern day prices, 1000 calories per day in cheap food available at the time (ie no big macs) costs about 2 dollars per person, per day. so, the total average amount of people in concentration camps is 60,000 per camp, multiplying this by a total of 151 camps constitutes over 9 million people to feed every day.
this amounts to $18 million every day, from 1933 - 1945 (assuming the lower population periods in the camp are balanced out by the higher ones near the end). This is a total of about 4,250 days or 76 billion dollars total investment. This does not include alot of other things related to keeping people alive and giving them work.

In addition, the work done in labor camps was mostly for the purpose of making death more efficient. Imagine spending a year building a special room that the Nazis would kill you in, instead of just shooting you outright.

However, considering all the circumstances, I would honestly rather have Hitler as a leader than any of your other options. In fact, I entirely owe my existence to Hitler forcing my grandfather into his army, and then walking all the way back to Hungary by foot.

 

Hitler.

Communism = dumbest thing on the planet
Musolini = didn't care about his people.