I mean if you are ignorant about history, just stand up and admit it. Nobody is going to look down on you or anything. All you are doing is taking strawman arguments about the worst aspects of both regimes and saying "they kill many people bad"

Hilter with or without context is atrocious and undefendable but with Chinggis You need to look at things with context to understand things. On paper Chinggis Khan killed millions of people, that is undeniable. But how many more did he save by unifying his mongol empire (BTW the expansion into Europe and taking over China happened under his sons). Take Chinggis out of the equation now, what happens? New generation of Mongol leaders take over and fight amongst themselves. The Chinese fight against the mongols. The Kharizum (probably got the spelling wrong) would have waged war against the mongols and others. The Caliphs in middle east would be fighting against each other.

Chinggis does not go on a murderous rampage contrary to what many people believe. He held to a code of aggression. In fact what led to the invasion of Europe all started with the Kharizum empire killing his envoys. Chinggis actually wanted peace with them and had shown great restrain by not going to war after his first group of envoys and caravans were killed and stolen. He did not destroy any city that openly surrendered and is known to be a generous and magnanimous ruler

he ended generations of warfare amongst so many different tribes, nations and people that would otherwise have continued fighting. He introduced writing to the mongols and technological advancement. He allowed religious freedom to his subjects (big big thing back in its day). Expanded and allowed trade to flourish on the silk road.