• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Worst Genocidal Mass-Murderer In History

The Worst Genocidal Murderer in History


  • Total voters
    52
contemporary sources said Moses parted the Red Sea or that Methusela lived for centuries

Only those that are insane

Temur razed quite a few cities in his multiple decade long campaigns, I dont know how many he killed but I do expect it to be over 1 million easily
 
according to this site Khan killed 30-40 million people.

Yes, but how many of those were the soldiers of the armies he has defeated and how many of those were innocent civilians? (murderer)

Besides that, what group of people did Khan try to annihilate? (Genocide)
 
Yes, but how many of those were the soldiers of the armies he has defeated and how many of those were innocent civilians? (murderer)

I would imagine quite a few.
Besides that, what group of people did Khan try to annihilate? (Genocide)

Asians. :mrgreen:
 
You should have put the Christian church on there... they killed far more people including genocidal campaigns against non believers.

:roll: evidence?
 
Josef Stalin
"Stalin himself is responsible for almost 43,000,000 of these. Most of the deaths, perhaps around 39,000,000 are due to lethal forced labor in gulag and transit thereto. "

R. J. Rummel
Professor emeritus of political science at the University of Hawaii.
MURDER BY COMMUNISM
 
Yeah, I had the top score on one of the games.

Pfft.
I'm DP's all-time arcade's champion.
I've held 31 championships at one point of time, then I've left to get a life. :lol:
 
Pfft.
I'm DP's all-time arcade's champion.
I've held 31 championships at one point of time, then I've left to get a life. :lol:

you've been here longer than i have, but i would've had all the top scores if the arcade hadn't vanished *cough*
 
I've decided to bump this back up to the top, as hopefully it'll encourage a new wave of poster and voters -- with any luck, voters with a sliver of historical knowledge.
 
For your next gem of idiocy -- try not to use words like "Eurosocialist" in a negative light, because to that small group of 6.4 billion people living outside of America, socialism (especially European Union-style), is the most successful and competent socioeconomic theory on the planet. I would like to point out that us "Eurosocialists" don't hate what America stands for -- we just think you're backwards tools. It isn't fitting for us to hate lesser beings. XD
First off, Europe is no where near beeing socialist. If they were, they would be poor oppressive countries, like every single country that has tried socialism.

They are capitalist countries, but less than other countries around the world. However, they are actually not doing well at all. Germany, France and Italy has all three of them had very low growth rates the last 15 years. Spain has an unemployment of 20% and Greece is in a terrible shape. Even Scandinavia underperforms, because Scandinavians are historically very productive and organized. Just look at how well, Scandinavians do in the US. There is no poverty among scandinavian-americans. Some of the countries doing better, Ireland, Switzerland, UK, Netherlands are more right wing. The ones doing the worst, France, Italy, Greece are left wing countries. Just take a look at economic freedom indexes.

On a more serious note, however, I would like to point you to the current economic situation as compared between America and Europe. The socialist (gasp!) European Union has weather the economic crisis exponentially better than America has,
So that's why Europe ended up with lower growth rates than the US during the crisis, even though US started the crisis. Actually the unemployment in Europe is the same as US, but it did increase more in the US. However, american unemployment is going down much faster as well. Why? Because in Europe it is very hard to fire employees, also there are more restrictions for companies to invest and create jobs.

But US isn't the model for a capitalist economy. In many ways it's quite left-wing. Capitalist countries such as Hong Kong and Singapore is doing extremly well. Singapore got 45.7% economic growth per year in the first quarter of 2010 and 24% in the second quarter and they are allready richer than the US. Australia got number 3 in the economic freedom index, US got number 8. They are doing very well, and has the highest economic growth among white western countries.
 
Last edited:
Are you a child, or just someone who regularly listens to FOX News?

Neither. Don't get too offensive. I have a way of embarrassing the ignorant like you who feel the need for personal insults to "prove" their adulthood.

The Americans have always, since the start of your young nation, been behind the curb of progress, compared to Europe (especially Britain, France and Germany). I could list innumerable examples of how America is still in the 19th century compared to Europe (stem cell research bans, lack of universal healthcare, shoddy welfare, total disregard for enriched education), but that's not what I'm going to debate right now -- those are universally accepted facts, anyway.

You won't debate these things because one, they have nothing to do with the subject of genocide, and two, you are focusing on particular aspects of western society, which is what I could do. Pointless, seeing has how America is greater at some things and Europe is greater at others. But I'm an an adult capable of discussing as an adult.

Back to genocide, Europe's ongoing fascination for genocide lasted well into the twentieth century with Germany and Russia and into the 90's in the Balkans where European governments were more than willing to ignore. And Spain was a dictatorship of brutality and oppression well into the 70s was it not? But this is a European progress Europeans pretend doesn't exist as they unfairly bash away at a nation across the ocean that long placed genocide in the rear view mirror.

Your intentional use of "young nation" is clinical proof of the resentment held by Europeans who can't cope with the fact that your historical powers have been reduced to nothing in the face of usurpers across the sea largely through your own behaviors. Grow up.

What I'm going to incredulously question you on is how exactly you think the Americans "voluntarily chose to face the moral consequences of genocide". America has done nothing of the sort, apart from a mere pittance of money given to the American Indians still living on reservations for "past crimes" -- America would sooner balk than admit it was the perpetrator of a continent-wide genocide.

America has faced, admitted, and facilitated apologies on many levels to native Americans. It can not bring back the dead. What has Europe done about it's long history of ethnic cleansings and genocides throughout history? America's one inherited genocide on the American frontier equals the countless genocides across Europe throughout history? To you this is sound, because Europeans have a psycological need to alleviate guilt and cultural shame. To answer your question, it was America that fought a Civil War to free slaves and America that identified what it had done to the native American long after Europeans set the pace of genocide (prior to 1774). Come the twentieth century, it was America that had to come across the ocean to make Europe face it's own genocides during WWII and again in the 90s in the Balkans. Could you not do this on your own? History suggests a definate no.

Furthermore, in no way did the Americans come over to Europe to "force Europeans to face" our own moral failings with the genocides we've committed -- it's prepostrous. The Americans weren't liberators or saviours or heroes, as much as Hollywood would like to re-write history as such -- no, the Americans were, on the grand scale of World War II, a bunch of pragmatic cowards who stayed out of the war as long as they could, and then only joined in on the side they knew would win already due to the sacrifices of greater nations.

Typical European. Paying attention Bub? He and Pete represent your kind......

It's your education systems that have been long seeking to rewrite history in a fashion that leaves you with a sense of dignity. In the end, it was American forces that had to come across the ocean, after fighting it's own war in the Pacific, to engineer Normandy. After fighting the Japanses largely all alone, Americans had to come to your pathetic aids because you weren't strong enough or culturaly savvy enough to preserve yourselves. It was America that facilitated the counterattack after the British had been kicked off the continent (France was nothing and Spain was a non-player). It was America that got sucked into what was your business to handle but proven incapable to handle. It was American oil that provided the bulk of resources to aid the allies. In the end, German engineered genocide was put to the rest because America decided to be a player in your unearned liberations (which Russia now receives aaaaaaaal the credit).

Is this where European education has evolved to now? What say you Pete? Seeking America as the coward in history? Pathetic. Your'e just embarrassed that you can never solve your own self induced crisis without us. Even WWI needed an American engineered Bellaeu Wood to save Paris and turn that first European civil war around. And the Cold War? Good luck without American power. In the end, you wish to call us cowards for showing up late as if we are responsible for you. Then you boldly label us as "young" as if we don't matter. You very much appear to have emotional problems of identity (wannabe Soviet) while seeking to blast America no matter what. In the end, Germany was the power in Europe. It would have been far less deadlier to Americans to simple shake German hands rather than liberating the defeated French, bruised out British and what ever else was in the underground. A Cold War would have been far easier too with an allied Nazi Germany taking the heat from the Soviet Union.

Congratulations Pete. Your hunger to blast all things American has you celebrating stupidity.


Where, in that, do you see America showing the Europeans the 'wrongness of their ways'?

It's not about showing you anything. It's about having to be involved in your messes. Were you involved with our Civil War or Civil Rights or dealing with Native American genocides, which were rooted in European engineering in the 17th century? Nope. Americans tackled these things within their own society without outsider help. Can European ever say the same thing with both World Wars, a Cold War and the "Yugoslavian" event proving otherwise?


As I recall, only a few short years later, the Americans were committing their own war crimes in Korea, and then committing full-on napalm-style genocide in Vietnam.

Hardly war crimes. In the mean time, the French were torturing hundreds of thousands of Algerians publicly (no punishments handed out). But this is what Europeans like you do isn't it? Seek any American imperfection to make themselves feel better about a complete absurdity in their history as if it soothes the guilt. Hell, a few waterboard events against probable terrorists makes European torture programs non-existent. Hundreds of thousands of tortured Algerians are washed away because a handful got waterboarded by Americans in 2005-ish.

Here you actually sought the Korean War and Vietnam War (French origins by the way) to wash away Nazi Germany behavior. I guess the ovens and the 18 million slaughtered in Korea and Vietnam for their differences from "perfection" escaped the history books you've personally made for yourself (and apparently Pete EU).

Oh, yes, those upstanding Americans surely hold the high-ground over us measly, intolerant Europeans.

We do. You people have proven to be more than capable of causing global crisis and not capable of dealing with them in the end without us. We have not needed you. It's you that have eventually grovelled for support and aid. You call us cowards for showing up late? I call you inept and completely proven to be incapable of handling your own instigated affairs. Even today's economic crisis is beyond European capability because you all leach so strongly to American table scraps for support and growth. In one breath you accuse us of being the "world policemen" and then accuse of cowards for not poking our noses into your affairs before you'ev obliterated any chance of self preservation. Your kind are pathetic. So deep in your denials of self identity you cling to fantasy and stupidity for your own sense of fabricated dignity and pride.
 
Ahh your usual crap. First off European history is longer than 100 years.. I know as an American that can be mindblowing that a nation has a history longer than 250 years, but that is a fact. Secondly, when the two world wars came about, religion had been thrown to the side and it was as you said "tribes" as in nations fighting each other. However, long before those wars, there was over 1000 years (yea mind blowing I know!) of history where wars were fought based on tribe/country and more than often with a religious aspect. And in almost every war, both sides used "God" as a motivation factor and often reasoning to smite their enemies. Add to that many civil wars between Christian sects... the English civil war and so on.

I'm not sure what your argument is. Your attempt to insult merely proves your depraved intellect. You seem to be agreeing that Europe is a tribal region, not religious. Religious wars in Europe had always been divided between borders of tribes. You seek smaller conflicts to settle your sense of religious wars. But in the end, the greater bloodshed has always been between Catholic states and Protestant states and this was determined by tribe. By the time of Europe's World Wars, tribe continued on in it's historical fashion without the need to blame it on Christianity. Like I stated, you people are merely the Middle East Lite.

People associate religion far too often to escape the truth that the utlimate culprit lies upon tribal identity. Even Islam does this. Wave off the mask of ISlam, and what you find is a Sunni Tribe above all else.

I never claimed Islam was perfect, but I did claim that while Christian Europe was in its Dark Ages, the Islamic world had its golden age where all major religions were welcome and treated with respect and often treated as equals. Did that last? Of course not, and I never claimed it did. When Christianity started its reformation, the Islamic world was in total free fall from internal conflicts and of course from attacks by radical Christians during the crusades.

Oh I never claimed that you claimed it was perfect. But your implications was that Christianity was far worse than Islam. You are wrong. It was that Arab Islamic empire that exploded out of the desert ot topple empires of non-Islamic faith (Persia and Byzantine). It was Islamic law that facilitated Arabs to designate that slaves were to be identified as black Africans for the Arab Slave Trade, which facilitated Europe's idea of the African for the Atlantic Slave Trade. It was Arabs that tolerated Christians and Jews as long as they behaved in accordance to oppressive laws under their roofs. It was a French relative of Charlemagne that halted the Islamic invasion into France from the Spanish Moors as they slaughtered Chrisitians and Jews not yet consumed under their roofs. It was Polish King who halted Islamic Ottomans from their continual slaughter of non-Islamic people in Vienna. It was the French that finally decided that selling out the continent was not in their ultimate best interests any longer and faced Ottoman attacks upon Chrisitian towns in the east. And all along their history, Muslims have and continued to slaughter far more Muslims than anybody outside the religion has ever done.


Yes, but it is better than being forced to convert like in the Christian world.

More of a European problem than a Christian one. But refusing to play in accordance to oppressive prescription meant excommunication from the community and eventually death for plenty.

Not really, depends on the time frame we are talking about. During the golden age.. no, after.. yes. Then again, when the oh so tolerant Christians took over former Muslim areas of Europe, these oh so tolerant Christians did what to the mosques.. oh yea, tor them down or defaced them by planting a church in the middle.. ahh the tolerance.... ever heard of the Great Mosque of Cordoba?

No...REALLY! You, I assume, are referring to a period within midieval Spain before the Inquisitions. There is wonderful book called the "Ornament of the World" that produces great knowledge on the matter (after the Golden Age, you are correct). This is what is known as an exception to the rule. Churches and Synagogues across the Islamic world were (and are) not allowed to rise above the heighth of a Mosque. If they were discovered to be higher after a conquest, they were torn down and defaced. Likewise were any referrences to God, because Sunni Muslims do not believe in idols of any kind, which is one of the aspects that places them at odds with the Shia. Pretending this was a one way act is dishonest. I believe you know enough about some of this history to know better than to make an argument otherwise.

But referring back to the example of Spain, those were hardly original Arabs. They were largely northern African Moors and their caliphate was in competition with an Arab caliphate in Baghdad, which did not seek to create any kind of equality between Sunni Muslims and anybody else.


Again, so what? It is still better than being forced converted or driven out of your home or killed because you have the wrong religion... where did that happen.. oh yea in Christian Europe. Just ask the Jews..

Well, see...this is my point and this is why "so what." Germany hardly needed Christian scripture to rally hate for Jews. The biggest display of hatred in history, which facilitated the greatest display of human slaughter, did not need Christianity to furnish it. It was simply the same old European tribal motivation that sought to ethnically cleanse the outsiders in their midst that history has seen over and over inside Europe. Jews were always the scapegoat in Europe. Christianity was merely a masked excuse before Hitler proved it so.

And this has to do with Islam anno 900 AD in what way? Do you know that as Christian you cant name your child how you want according to the Church right? My parents preacher denied my name until they proved that it was a family name going back 500 years.. go figure with all that tolerance. After all the preacher could not deny a name that was approved 500 years ago by one of his fellow holy men could he now..

I have no idea what you are talking about. My reasong for bringing up Saudi Arabia today was to show how little things have changed within Islam. I do not know of any rules or laws within the Christian world that is professed to be sanctioned by government or church that restricts a parent from identifying history.

So what. Saudi Arabia is hardly the whole of Islam. 1.2+ billion Muslims and Saudi Arabia has at best about 30 million or so..



And again, how is that different than anywhere else? Gays in America are held to different laws (some) than non gays.. how is that in any way different?

Well, we're talking about religion, not social sexual awareness or equality. And Suaid Arabia funds an enormous amounts of Mosques outside their territory, which spreads the Sunni vision of Islam. This is more than something just to dismiss. You obviously have no problems declaring the evils of the Catholic Church during Europe's religious turmoil, but refuse to identify the Saudi Sunni and what they are causing in the name of religion? It's more than OK if you do. It's actually accurate.

Yea, and again so what. US evangelicals are using their power to dictate homosexuality laws in Uganda... only international outrage prevented (so far) that the Evangelicals got their way and made homosexuality punishable by death. Catholic Church still allows witch burnings in Nigeria and so on and so on. Or the US funding abstinence programs over condom programs to stem AIDS in Africa..same thing.


Again, that is Islam of today, not Islam of 1000+ years ago.

Um, yes. It is the Islam of 1000+ years ago. Islam began as a colonial power as it sucked the cultures of others into it and forced a twist or Sunni loyalty upon it. The Islamic explosion during the "Rightly Guided Caliphates" was about consuming the infidel world into the empire no matter the consequences. Bakr (the first caliphate after Muhammad's death) instigated immediate wars with the Persian empire and the Byzantine empire. The next two caliphs fought wars against the Islamic Shia to protect the Sunni Arab empire and its ideals of Islam. This means that Islam's roots placed it at odds with Chrisitians, non-Muslims, and non-Sunni Arabs. The thousand years that followed as it consumed territories as far as Spain (your territory), Poland, and eastern Asia was about colonialism and dominance as it spread the Sunni vision of Islam. This is why I believe that many of today's adherents of Islam are merely unwittingly pledging allegiance to a certain tribe rather than God.

Of course, we just like to self-flagilate over "Western Imperialism," which later merely sought to take back lost land.
 
God. (allegedly!)

Based on what?


Both World Wars (15 million in the First and 60 million in Europe's Second civil disturbance) beat each other out for the "Guinness" historical record for highest death count. Of course, with Mao engineering the death of 40 to 70 million people, Stalin engineering 9 million corpses, and Pol Pots 1 million in Cambodia one could argue that Communism or Socialism is the history's worst genocidal murderer.

No matter the culprit, that's a total of about 130 million people that died in the twentieth century without religion behind it or God instigating a thing. The "Age of Ideology" was horribly brutal to humanity. It was an age where idiots professed to engineer systems of governance that "perfected" society. Perhaps we have learned as a people that imperfect human beings will always dissapoint the "perfect" system. However, many in this world still long for that next "-ism" to create utopia, don't they?

"God" is a default answer that lacks insight.
 
:roll: evidence?

"The Christian Church" is what allows his kind to alleviate European responsibility for their instigated World Wars that have caused more death than anything. In the end, no religion can compete to what Europeans did without God in the 19th and 20th century. On an economic level, Europeans can be accused. On an Individual basis, Europeans can be accused. And on a global event, Europeans can again be accused. But the church? In the end, it goes back to Europeans and their use of religion to slaughter and ethnically cleanse people (even their own).

I have always found it quite comical how Europeans pretend that all bloodshed across Europe and in colonies was due to "Christianity" until the turn of the century when they simply decided to slaughter without God. Isn't it obvious that "God" was never the problem?
 
So that's why Europe ended up with lower growth rates than the US during the crisis, even though US started the crisis. Actually the unemployment in Europe is the same as US, but it did increase more in the US. However, american unemployment is going down much faster as well. Why? Because in Europe it is very hard to fire employees, also there are more restrictions for companies to invest and create jobs.

Well, there's also the fact that American unemployment is normally low, which gives it a natural place to drop, whereas European unemployment is naturally high and doesn't have much room to go before it reaches its norm. Also, when Europeans were scoffing at American "Bail Out" programs to preserve the morons in our economy, Europeans negated to impliment any real damage control on their end, which is why the tribes of Europe (under the EU) have been at each other's throats as they evolved into their own "Bail Out" programs.
 
Neither. Don't get too offensive. I have a way of embarrassing the ignorant like you who feel the need for personal insults to "prove" their adulthood.



You won't debate these things because one, they have nothing to do with the subject of genocide, and two, you are focusing on particular aspects of western society, which is what I could do. Pointless, seeing has how America is greater at some things and Europe is greater at others. But I'm an an adult capable of discussing as an adult.

Back to genocide, Europe's ongoing fascination for genocide lasted well into the twentieth century with Germany and Russia and into the 90's in the Balkans where European governments were more than willing to ignore. And Spain was a dictatorship of brutality and oppression well into the 70s was it not? But this is a European progress Europeans pretend doesn't exist as they unfairly bash away at a nation across the ocean that long placed genocide in the rear view mirror.

Your intentional use of "young nation" is clinical proof of the resentment held by Europeans who can't cope with the fact that your historical powers have been reduced to nothing in the face of usurpers across the sea largely through your own behaviors. Grow up.



America has faced, admitted, and facilitated apologies on many levels to native Americans. It can not bring back the dead. What has Europe done about it's long history of ethnic cleansings and genocides throughout history? America's one inherited genocide on the American frontier equals the countless genocides across Europe throughout history? To you this is sound, because Europeans have a psycological need to alleviate guilt and cultural shame. To answer your question, it was America that fought a Civil War to free slaves and America that identified what it had done to the native American long after Europeans set the pace of genocide (prior to 1774). Come the twentieth century, it was America that had to come across the ocean to make Europe face it's own genocides during WWII and again in the 90s in the Balkans. Could you not do this on your own? History suggests a definate no.



Typical European. Paying attention Bub? He and Pete represent your kind......

It's your education systems that have been long seeking to rewrite history in a fashion that leaves you with a sense of dignity. In the end, it was American forces that had to come across the ocean, after fighting it's own war in the Pacific, to engineer Normandy. After fighting the Japanses largely all alone, Americans had to come to your pathetic aids because you weren't strong enough or culturaly savvy enough to preserve yourselves. It was America that facilitated the counterattack after the British had been kicked off the continent (France was nothing and Spain was a non-player). It was America that got sucked into what was your business to handle but proven incapable to handle. It was American oil that provided the bulk of resources to aid the allies. In the end, German engineered genocide was put to the rest because America decided to be a player in your unearned liberations (which Russia now receives aaaaaaaal the credit).

Is this where European education has evolved to now? What say you Pete? Seeking America as the coward in history? Pathetic. Your'e just embarrassed that you can never solve your own self induced crisis without us. Even WWI needed an American engineered Bellaeu Wood to save Paris and turn that first European civil war around. And the Cold War? Good luck without American power. In the end, you wish to call us cowards for showing up late as if we are responsible for you. Then you boldly label us as "young" as if we don't matter. You very much appear to have emotional problems of identity (wannabe Soviet) while seeking to blast America no matter what. In the end, Germany was the power in Europe. It would have been far less deadlier to Americans to simple shake German hands rather than liberating the defeated French, bruised out British and what ever else was in the underground. A Cold War would have been far easier too with an allied Nazi Germany taking the heat from the Soviet Union.

Congratulations Pete. Your hunger to blast all things American has you celebrating stupidity.




It's not about showing you anything. It's about having to be involved in your messes. Were you involved with our Civil War or Civil Rights or dealing with Native American genocides, which were rooted in European engineering in the 17th century? Nope. Americans tackled these things within their own society without outsider help. Can European ever say the same thing with both World Wars, a Cold War and the "Yugoslavian" event proving otherwise?




Hardly war crimes. In the mean time, the French were torturing hundreds of thousands of Algerians publicly (no punishments handed out). But this is what Europeans like you do isn't it? Seek any American imperfection to make themselves feel better about a complete absurdity in their history as if it soothes the guilt. Hell, a few waterboard events against probable terrorists makes European torture programs non-existent. Hundreds of thousands of tortured Algerians are washed away because a handful got waterboarded by Americans in 2005-ish.

Here you actually sought the Korean War and Vietnam War (French origins by the way) to wash away Nazi Germany behavior. I guess the ovens and the 18 million slaughtered in Korea and Vietnam for their differences from "perfection" escaped the history books you've personally made for yourself (and apparently Pete EU).



We do. You people have proven to be more than capable of causing global crisis and not capable of dealing with them in the end without us. We have not needed you. It's you that have eventually grovelled for support and aid. You call us cowards for showing up late? I call you inept and completely proven to be incapable of handling your own instigated affairs. Even today's economic crisis is beyond European capability because you all leach so strongly to American table scraps for support and growth. In one breath you accuse us of being the "world policemen" and then accuse of cowards for not poking our noses into your affairs before you'ev obliterated any chance of self preservation. Your kind are pathetic. So deep in your denials of self identity you cling to fantasy and stupidity for your own sense of fabricated dignity and pride.

My God, you're like a Glenn Beck quote machine. With your left hand you tell me off for calling you blinded and ignorant, and with your right, you call me the very same thing. I'm not going to go through your veritable excerpt from the Tea Party Manifesto, as anyone who reads it quickly gathers that if you had replaced all your words with "USA! USA! USA!", you would've achieved the same effect -- that is, rallying the nationalistic, idiot masses of your nation to a history so warped you probably believe Rush Limbaugh when he says America is God's Blessed Gift to the Earth.

I could go into detail and list every problem with your little rant, but it'd be a waste of my time -- I'm simply going to pick out a few pieces of lunacy that shine so bright I don't know how anyone can't be totally aware of your blinding bull****.

Firstly, America didn't win either of the World Wars. At the end of the day, you can ask any historian whose names don't include "Glenn" or "Beck" in that order, and they'll tell you such. It boggles my mind that Americans somehow think that their country, which cowardly came late to both wars, fought in only a small minority of the battles, and pathetically supplied both sides, can somehow claim they won the wars. It is, to anyone with any historical knowledge whatsoever, precisely as ridiculous as claiming that Australia won the world wars. If the Australians want to think that, we'll bloody well let them.

For another point, America's try at crimes against humanity absolutely pales in comparison to Europe's... If you forget about the Phillipines at the turn of the century, the KKK and daily lynchmobs in the South across the Depression, the massacres of Latin and South Americans by CIA agents, the race riots all across post-war America, Detroit 1968, the MacArthurite policies of napalming everything that moved in Vietnam, or mining everything that COULD move in Korea, Guantanamo Bay, Abu Ghraib, or those regrettable McCarthyist executions during the, what, fifth, sixth wave of the Red Scare? I might also note that fighting a civil war over the issue of freeing blacks from slavery sixty years after the civilised world peacefully voted to do so is nothing to be proud of.

I also find it amusing that in the post directly below the one I'm responding to, you defend and glorify all things European, just because Europe was Christian and the Middle East was Muslim at the time. Well done, that.

So let me give your little hierarchy a try, yeah? I imagine that you'll always support the Europeans in an argument over the Muslims, but you'll support the Americans over the Europeans. And then, just a wild guess, your dogma will tell you that within the "American" circle to side with anything labelled "Republican" over anything labelled "Democrat", and beyond that, at your innermost circle, to support anything "Conservative" over anything "Liberal".

So, you essentially think that only Conservative Republican Christian Americans are right, and everyone else is a Godless/worthless/spineless/foreign piece of scum.


You're the kind of man that makes your country great, sir!
 
Wouldn't this be like comparing Jeffrey Dahlmer to Ted Bundy? Look, Stalin killed 20 million and Mao killed 60 million and Hitler killed 12 million, does that mean that Mao was most evil, Stalin was the second most evil, and Hitler was the third most evil? NO! It's a ridiculous comparison. It would be like saying Ted Bundy was more evil than Jeffrey Dahlmer because he managed to kill more people.
 
Wouldn't the worse one be the one that killed the least, as they'd suck at being a genocidal mass murderer.
 
You should have put the Christian church on there... they killed far more people including genocidal campaigns against non believers.

Put the Spanish Inquisition in there, the bastards.
 
Back
Top Bottom