Prince Charles recently compared Russia’s trenchant leader Vladimir Putin to Hitler, but the comparison may not go far enough. Rapid and terse condemnation came from the Russian Foreign Ministry and the Russian president himself.

The liberal British press also climbed all over the comments. Their concerns augured somewhere between ghastly and preposterous. One British M.P. went so far as to suggest the prince abdicate and stand for election if he wants to express himself like that. British Prime Minister David Cameron and other high-ranking politicians spoke publicly in support of the prince.

The most alarming remarks about the prince’s comments can be found online at The Commentator and carried by the news website RealClearWorld in an article titled “Prince Charles, Putin and Hitler: Dangerous References.”

The editorial firmly denounces the prince’s comments as silly, irresponsible and deeply flawed. In their view, Prince Charles is trivializing who Hitler was and what he stood for. “For one thing,” they explain, “we should be smart enough to have other historical (and contemporary) reference points for bad things that happen in the world without resorting to the use of incendiary references to Adolf Hitler.”

President Putin is almost single-handedly reordering the post-Cold War world. Thus far he has extinguished home threats and set himself up as a czar; trampled upon the democratic republics of Georgia and Ukraine; and deftly severed and brashly annexed Crimea, effecting a clandestine operation to undermine the balance of Kiev’s autonomy over the remaining eastern territories that border Russia. Putin’s support for Syria’s Bashar Assad as well as the Iranian regime explicitly and surreptitiously flout international law and the autonomy of free and democratic nations not seen since Saddam Hussein—but with far graver consequences.

Many analysts can see Putin is changing the course of world history—in Ukraine, he is also changing people’s lives. Setting aside the ongoing violence and death caused by his recent actions, the United Nations refugee agency reports some 10,000 people have been affected by Putin’s actions in Crimea. These are real people—displaced from their homes.

The Commentator article goes on to explain the main fault of a Putin-Hitler comparison is that it is not exact and thus should be avoided. Hitler, after all, pursued a genocidal, expansionist, totalitarian ideology. Putin hasn’t done the genocidal thing. He’s just a totalitarian with expansionist predilections. If people get hurt, at least it is not on the level of genocide.

This is dangerous thinking. The law of history and Bible prophecy explain the type of thinking The Commentator is advancing trivializes Putin’s potential for further evil! It is the kind of thinking that leads to major tragedies because it lulls people to sleep, or it just plain tries to intimidate: Stop hectoring the Russian president. It’s dimwitted. Therein lies the serious danger of misreading the signs of the times as the blind lead the blind into a ditch.

The world will soon see that so-called trivial comparisons of Putin to Hitler may not go far enough. This is not character assassination—it is what the Bible says. A Russian leader is prophesied to come on the scene to lead a group of Asian powers with an army of 200 million men in war against Europe.

If it’s not Putin—especially with his eye-opening behavior—who is it? Trumpet editor in chief Gerald Flurry has written extensively on this subject of the potential of Putin being thisman—this “prince of Rosh,” as he is called in the Bible. You can read about these unbreakable, soon-to-be fulfilled prophecies here and here.

In the language of the Bible, this Eurasian vs. European war is called the second woe—second of three great woes. By this second woe, one third of all mankind will be killed. Hitler never caused this much bloodshed. This prince of Rosh is going to cause the death of one third of all mankind—hundreds of millions, possibly even a few billion. You can read more about it here. The acts of Hitler will seem trivial by comparison.

Could there be a danger of trivializing the potential of Putin’s actions? Perhaps even the man himself? Might there be a serious danger in trivializing the seismic prophetic events his behavior is causing in Europe? Prophecy shows Prince Charles is right to say what he did—to make the comparison, even if it offends some people’s sensibilities. In the words of another famous Englishman, Winston Churchill, “Perhaps it is better to be irresponsible and right, than to be responsible and wrong.”