Thank you Owl, this is the point I wanted to make and if only one of you can see the same way, I am happy that you at least know the real story.

Speak for yourself! If I found my daughter dressed up as Genghis and ritually eviscerating one of her friends I would probably think more than just twice about it

Konrad, you are of course correct (but hey, I said Khan first ).  The decision is purely commercial in the end.  I guess the point is, why is Hitler so despised that it would hurt commercial sales while Stalin is not?  For some reason the systematic, industrialized methods of genocide seem far more despicable than what Stalin did, even if he killed more people on paper.  I suspect far more people know about Hitler's evils than Stalin's as well.  No doubt the USSR had to be represented as "Russia" as well and who better to portray it than Uncle Joe?  Lenin?  Kruschev?  Birth mark guy ?  Nazi Germany was a relatively short time frame and I'm not so sure it "had" to be represented as much as the USSR, but that's bordering on opinion .

Its interesting because you guys started talking about me directly...

As for the 3 leaders in question, I think that from a historical perspective they are all very important figures.  They did some good things, and a lot of horrible things.  There is no true gradient for evil, it is subjective and based on variants of morality.  But they are all very important historically, I dont think there is any argument there.

The point about Hitler and his particular breed of hate being used today as a symbol of martyrdom or as a symbol of the Nazi/Skinhead manifesto is well taken.  It unfortunately is somewhat of a symptom of the Jewish propaganda machine creating Hitler to be more then he was.  Let us not forget his very loyal and able cohorts who not only supported Hitler, but added to his message and feed into it.  By creating the image of the Nazi leader as root of all evil, they have given those who would continue to hate, an icon to idolize and worship.

In the end, Hitler and Stalin were men who exploited and destroyed their own people for their own hunger for power.  Many think Hitler used his rhetoric to create hate, however the more reasonable explanation is that he simply taped into an emotion  that was already abundant in Germany at that time.  Stalin did everything for the good of of Nationalism and yet, somehow that included starving his own people and silencing any who might question his absolute rule, namely those who were well educated.

Let's be careful not to blame the victims here.  I hope you are not implying that Hitler's regime did not exterminate 6 million jews.  Just because he wasn't the one turning on the gas chambers, does not mean he was not responsible for them.  Don't get me wrong, Himmler and Eichmann, among others, were evil too but they weren't the top man.  The buck stops at the top.  If there's a scale of evil, Hitler gets a 10 while Stalin gets a 9.5. 

Other than the autobaun and the Volzwagen beetle, what good thing did Hitler do?

ADDIT: Think of all the wasted nights downloading the patches, not too mention the bazillion hours actually playing CivX.  Ahem......looking for CivXXX by the way.  I'll stick around fer that one!