"but there´s something very very wrong about what´s happening in Syria and something must be done for those people."

how about not funding rebel groups with connections to al qaeda and isis?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/may/08/free-syrian-army-rebels-defect-islamist-group

or maybe he is just pandering??? crazy idea i know =/

He's saying that he can understand why socialism exists and was gaining popularity, but not necessarily that they were socialist.

As for Scandinavia, that's a common misconception too, as they are social democracies, but not socialist states.

Ahh the Hitler argument when the left has nothing to fight back with thats the go to, or some other BS. Means nothing and goes nowhere.

still means nothing. hitler just left office if you ask a conservative so whats your point. Hitler is the word for anyone who opposes your view now.

Just to be clear, government spending is not the same thing as socialism. Government spending predates socialism by millennia.

Socialism involves government spending, but in a very specific way.

When we say "socialism" today, especially in English, it is specifically referring to what Marx and Engels described. Not State Socialism, not National Socialism. By translating Nazism into national socialism, and then calling it socialism - you are conflating two very different things.
It would be like translating the Swiss or Austrian "Ground Apple" and using that as an argument to say that potatoes are a kind of apple. The correct generic word for Nazism is fascism.

Fascism NOT related to Marxist socialism, it is in extreme opposition of it.

The goal of socialism is the elimination of class struggle. Equalization of income is a major aim, and is independent of race, creed, and other factors.
The goal of fascism is to codify and regulate the class struggle and the strengthening of nationalistic ideals. They are against equalization of income and instead believe in strong income for strong merits toward the national identity (e.g. a strongly built, healthy, blond-haired, blue-eyed, productive, pure-blooded German would see the highest rewards).
The Nazi brand of fascism acknowledges the superiority of the Aryan master race and believes in extremist social Darwinistic action to be taken against Jews, Slavs, Marxists, blacks, gays, and other groups - which included enslavement and extermination.

Economically: fascism is neither left nor right, and it is not something in the middle either, it's a completely different axis; more like up or down; since leftist economies aim to help out the poor and weak and do not aim to make an elite group rich, fascism is the opposite and specifically aims to make their elites rich; but, it is not a free market like right-wing economics either, since the rules are set up so specific people fitting a proper national image are the ones that can prosper (rather than, as Hitler put it, the Jews).
Socially: with left being globalist, and right being nationalistic, fascism is definitely at the extreme right.

 Dude, enough, i was responding to the other guy who claimed that communism and fascism are the same. All im saying is, if your are gonna strawman the hell outta any left wing policy that some people like, at least quote Stalin, Mao or any actual left wing authoritarian leader u wanna throw at us. Hitler isnt one of them.

Nobody said the right is bad cuz Hitler tho. 

and what form of government did he use?

Get all the information out there, dont skim over the part you like.

i fu**ing hate democrats if that is what r u implying. I hate them so much that i couldnt bring myself to vote for Hillary even knowing how bad Trump and the republicans are.

and about your question... errrm communism?

Edit: Btw projection?

Ahh the Hitler argument when the left has nothing to fight back with thats the go to, or some other BS. Means nothing and goes nowhere.