Kyoko Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) If it wasn't for the Americans you would be speaking German right now. Death to the west. Edited October 2, 2015 by Kyoko Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peace and War Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Death to the west. Yes yes yes death to the west blah blah blah. I really still wonder why they don't let the rest of the world kill each other without getting involved. Quote "Experience demands that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the general prey of the rich on the poor." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 As I said before: "Most existed before the development of modern weapons of war (when people fought with swords/bow and arrows), and Stalin alone killed far more people than all of them combined." "At least 108 million people were killed in wars in the twentieth century. Estimates for the total number killed in wars throughout all of human history range from 150 million to 1 billion". -nytimes Your statement is false. To show how absurd your statement is we'll target the Iraq war. After so many years the estimated civilian death directly from the war started in 2003 (12 years) stands at 133,000. Now to compare it to an ancient invasion off the top of my head. In 193 in revenge against the Xu governor's (Tao Qian), Cao Cao invaded Xu province (for a year at most) and killed 100,000 civilians and would have killed more (some would say he aimed to kill every living person in Xu province) if Lu Bu hadn't attacking his now lightly defended territory (Cao Cao emptied it to attack Xu) at Zhang Miao's/Chen Gong's advice. Now Cao Cao was actually pretty tame for his time when it came to killing people, though you'd not get that from the above nor his reputation. The other big kill count of his was when he buried 70,000 of Yuan Shao's troops alive, but they were soldiers and Cao Cao had a logical reason for doing it (he barely had enough food for his army let alone 70,000 more mouths to feed, and if he let them go they'd pillage the near cities which Cao Cao wants to rule). So with that... why would Cao Cao uncharacteristically kill so many civilians? Religion. In Confucianism filial piety is very important, extremely so to the point that if someone kills your father you are justified to kill his entire family in revenge. Cao Cao normally wouldn't have killed all those people, but due to Confucianism he did. If it wasn't for the Americans you would be speaking German right now. Well actually no you're wrong there. The Nazis would have executed Ibrahim for being too much of a loony already. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim (Banned) Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 "At least 108 million people were killed in wars in the twentieth century. Estimates for the total number killed in wars throughout all of human history range from 150 million to 1 billion". -nytimes Why are you leaving out those killed in the 18th, 19th, and 21st century? Well actually no you're wrong there. The Nazis would have executed Ibrahim for being too much of a loony already. You would know being a Nazi dog and all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Why are you leaving out those killed in the 18th, 19th, and 21st century? You would know being a Nazi dog and all So 1 billion. 500 million needed for your statement. 20th century, a pretty big century for killing had 108 million. So those other 3 you mention (21st being small at that) have to have 393 million deaths or so. Yeah no. Being called a Nazi by an ISIS supporter. Cute. I condemn all the killing the Nazis did, there done. You can't do the same for ISIS so gg. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomasious Rubinlord Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 I personally believe Secularism is the basis of liberal thought, to live in a certain country without being enforced upon by dogmas, ideas and dieties you don't believe in. It is which able to legitimize the freedom of thought and belief without intervention by the authorities. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim (Banned) Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 So 1 billion. 500 million needed for your statement. 20th century, a pretty big century for killing had 108 million. So those other 3 you mention (21st being small at that) have to have 393 million deaths or so. Yeah no. No, not 1 billion. Your source says 150 million to 1 billion killed overall and I saw figures as high 262 million killed in the 20th century (source). I condemn all the killing the Nazis did, there done. Can you condemn the modern day Nazi duo of Assad and Putin? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 No, not 1 billion. Your source says 150 million to 1 billion killed overall and I saw figures as high 262 million killed in the 20th century (source). Can you condemn the modern day Nazi duo of Assad and Putin? "Dictatorships’ death toll: 262 million murdered in the 20th century -- and not by war" Try again. They're including the famines and such which if you want to include doesn't change the fact you're wrong one bit. In the ancient past huge numbers of people died of famine so you can inflate your number all you like. No they ain't modern day Nazis as their murders aren't based on ethnic grounds, though your heroes ISIS certainly do kill people based on their race though. Your opposing of Assad and Putin is also not based on civilian deaths due to after all you thinking ISIS killing non Muslims and "heretics" is a good thing, but simply because they oppose the most Holy ISIS. Whatever the case, I condemn all the killing of civilians Assad and Putin have done yes. Now condemn ISIS, lets hear it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ibrahim (Banned) Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 (edited) "Dictatorships’ death toll: 262 million murdered in the 20th century -- and not by war" Try again. They're including the famines and such which if you want to include doesn't change the fact you're wrong one bit. In the ancient past huge numbers of people died of famine so you can inflate your number all you like. There is a distinction between democidal famines (which are rightly included in the figures), and non-democidal famines. No they ain't modern day Nazis as their murders aren't based on ethnic grounds, though your heroes ISIS certainly do kill people based on their race though. Your opposing of Assad and Putin is also not based on civilian deaths due to after all you thinking ISIS killing non Muslims and "heretics" is a good thing, but simply because they oppose the most Holy ISIS. I'm not going to dignify such disingenuous dribble with a response. Whatever the case, I condemn all the killing of civilians Assad and Putin have done yes. I don't believe you. If you were being honest, you wouldn't support them. Edited October 2, 2015 by Ibrahim Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rozalia Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 There is a distinction between democidal famines (which are rightly included in the figures), and non-democidal famines. Try again, plenty of rulers of ancient times let people starve to death. To carry on with the three kingdoms examples, Dong Zhou for one. In fact out of 56 million people at the start, the population was 16 million by the eras end due to the constant warfare by warlords leading to so many people not just dying in battle, but from famines they had no care to fix. I'm not going to dignify such disingenuous dribble with a response. Do Assad and Putin kill on ethnic grounds now? That your new claim? Oh wait that wasn't it, me calling ISIS racist is whats got you hot and bothered isn't it? Oh no, can't offend the honourable ISIS. I don't believe you. If you were being honest, you wouldn't support them. An alien concept to someone who thinks all Muslims are perfect little things who can do no wrong I know, but you can support something while acknowledging that it ain't perfect. Assad/Putin are going to kill many civilians in this no doubt and thats wrong, however more wrong is letting the country fall to those murderous insane thugs you idolise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arthur Wellington Posted October 2, 2015 Share Posted October 2, 2015 Its my opinion that since the Enlightenment the world is slowly moving more and more towards a society ruled by the intelect rather then by tradition. Religion is, in my eyes, organized spiritualism and can co-exist with modern society. But as science has proven able to explain more and more about the world around us the importance of tradition and religion becomes smaller. Society will however take more time to accept a new paradigm that science provide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.