America's death toll on the world: 27,000,000++

Originally posted by Crispy_Chicken
As I tried to explain, everyone has the choice of how they are to act and behave. If a ruler chooses to be a blood thirsty oppressive dictator that is his (or her) decision and responsibility. To try to say America is completely at fault for how individual leaders behave is foolish. And rather condescending too I might say. What, those little brown people (or yellow people or black people) are incapable of independent thought and action? That's what you're really saying, that no-one apart from Americans has the ability to think for themselves or act independently. Let me see, if these regimes were relatively benign would you let America take the credit for that as well? Or do you only say it's America's fault if these governments turn out to be bad?

I think you need to study the circumstances of those reactionary regimes mentioned in this thread and others on this site. These dictators didnt just assume power, they recieved funding, training, and military support from the US national security apparatus for the express purpose of destabilization, counterrevolution, toruture, assination, and murder. US policy makers backed those autocrats in order to overthrow populist revolutionary governments, for the purpose of establishing a client-state economic system, with a comprador leader. Popular revolution infringes directly on the class perogitives of western capitalist states and therefor must be crushed with either surrogate forces, or direct military intervention.

US policy makers are directly responsible for the actions of dictators they support because it is those actions of attrition US policy makers wanted the dictators to preform.

If this is hard to understand, please look into some of the following cases with a critical perspective. Haiti, Angola, Mozabique, El Salvador, Nicaragua, Chile, and Indonesia, to name a few.

In these cases (and many more) US forces have either entered into the country for direct military conflict, or have trained and equiped the mercinary forces that have destablized the regions and overthrown the democratically elected reformist government.


[edit on 18-5-2007 by InSpiteOf]

[edit on 18-5-2007 by InSpiteOf]

Sort of like the Soviet Union/Russia with Eastern Europe and the more people they killed than Americans. But lets leave that out of this discussion, as it is not America.

So not equally mentioning the top two killers China and Russia, your point is to say only people killed by Americans are bad.

So, those lives Russia killed last century don't mean anything to a political agenda of yours?

I have a problem with the Native American death toll as being all American. The US colonies were part of the British Empire. Canada was under French/British Rule etc.

What is your breakdown of the fault and figure amount of the US Government killing 12 million Native Americans?

This thread should have been about the stupidity of war and repressive goverments. And then include the top killers and say how wasteful it is.

To latch on to one country, that isn't even half the total of a few countries belittles the deaths of untold millions.

I keep pointing out how we've all heard about their evils but we never hear about ours. But when we do automatically find someone else to point fingers at, so that we can ignore ours. That's from us all getting 'good' educations as "Americans" (really think about that one). And the killings continue as we speak.

"your point is to say only people killed by Americans are bad. "

Where did I say that? Stop putting words into my mouth.

I didn't say 12 million Natives.

China and Russia aren't currently killing masses. The imperial Soviet Union is dead. China's not military imperialist to any degree that even begins to resemble US. "We're" the worlds current threat to peace and stablitiy. War creates more war. "Our" past wars are wat created this war, and those attacks, and the attacks and wars that will only multiply from this if we don't make it stop. "We're" addicted to war.

27 million is lightweight compared to the 40 million+ legally aborted human beings flushed down the toilet in America since the fraudulent Roe v Wade case made abortion legal nationwide in the 1970s. Think about it... 40 million human beings erased as a matter of personal convenience. And, yes, I said convenience, as the overwhelming majority (97%) of abortions in this country are performed to "correct" the poor decisions made by sexually active females. Those abortions performed to "save the mother's life" or performed in the instances of rape and incest comprise a very lowly 3% of all abortions in the USA.

If this isn't genocide, what is?

Doc Velocity

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
27 million is lightweight compared to the 40 million+ legally aborted human beings flushed down the toilet in America since the fraudulent Roe v Wade case made abortion legal nationwide in the 1970s. Think about it... 40 million human beings erased as a matter of personal convenience. And, yes, I said convenience, as the overwhelming majority (97%) of abortions in this country are performed to "correct" the poor decisions made by sexually active females. Those abortions performed to "save the mother's life" or performed in the instances of rape and incest comprise a very lowly 3% of all abortions in the USA.

If this isn't genocide, what is?

Doc Velocity

This thread is about American Empire and Imperial domination, not abortion. Besides, the government has no right to tell a woman that she has to have a child, even if it is her fault (so to speak) that she's pregnant. Also, making abortion illegal just strengthens yet another class bias in the US. Where rich people can simply fly to Mexico or Canada and get an abortion, while the middle class and poor are stuck having another kid they cannot feed and take care of.

[edit on 22-6-2007 by InSpiteOf]

Originally posted by KonigKaos
Anothr horrible post by yet another Anti-American!]

`````````````````````````````
Please read ABOUT ATS: Warnings for one-line or short responses

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 13/5/07 by masqua]

Excuse me? What a blatantly ignorant thing to say. How is a citizen being against many brutal, (and in most cases) pointless killing being "anti American?"

I study politics, I've done it for a long time, I have a degree from a very reputable university in it. All I can say is that the ignorance and xenophobia expressed by the majority of posters in this thread makes me wish I had never tried, never spent the hours and hours studying and never traveled all over in order to get a perspective different from my own- people just don't get it. Props to the original poster for having the courage to do the research and post here. My only advice would be next time, post somewhere where the majority of people are over 18 and have high-school diplomas. The FACT is that we've sponsored DIRECTLY many, many people that have in turn used our money, arms and training to kill innocent people. Don't believe me? do some research on a man named Mobutu Sese Seko. Please read up on him and tell me honestly if our hands are clean in JUST THAT ONE instance.

The mantra on ATS is "deny ignorance." Wake up people, whether you agree with the 27M figure or not, it cannot be denied that MILLIONS of people have been directly or indirectly killed by the U.S. This is an incontrovertible, mainstream fact I guess the rub comes in when you have to determine for yourself if they deserved it. Read up on the Congolese and tell me what threat they posed to us. We kill people for reasons our government rightly or wrongly assesses- directly or with our money. Pointing that out is not unpatriotic or wrong as so many of you suggest. Whether or not you want to open your eyes to this fact is your choice.

[edit on 8-8-2007 by andyzero1234]

[edit on 8-8-2007 by andyzero1234]

Inannamute

Frances role in the war? how long did it take for them to be over-run?

The US did wait a while to commit military troops to the war in Europe but long before then we were sending convoy after convoy of ships to England to keep them supplied, Google "Liberty Ships" and read up on that. American aviators also volunteered for the RAF, via Canada but there presence wasnt a huge contribution but they did what they could.
The British people were a stubborn and very strong willed bunch, the only thing that saved them from land invasion was the Battle of Britain, which crippled the Luftwaffe and its likely that without the will of the British people the war in Europe wouldve lasted much longer.
However, none of that couldve been possible without the millions of tons of supplies that we sent across the Atlantic, fuel, oil and food etc...
British soldiers were failing in almost every campaign, they lost Singapore to the Japs in under 100 days. Then there are their defeats in Greece and their humiliating retreat at Dunkirk.
If we had not entered the war, Britain would have taken quite a bit longer to be able to put together a land invasion and who knows if it wouldve been successful.
I will tell you what wins wars and it isnt just about how many troops are killed. its called Industry!
Our industry couldnt be touched which allowed us to produce thousands of war machines, ships, tanks, airplanes and not to mention logistical support.
As far as Russian goes, well, who knows how that wouldve turned out if Germany had not had to fight two fronts but its likely the Russians wouldve eventually won because their territory is so vast that they could pump out the Industry as well. Could you imagine Russia being the sole victor in Europe? They wouldve taken every piece of land they could get their hands on, including England if they had wanted them. Without American presence in Europe, i doubt you would all be speaking German, like most people claim but you probably would be speaking Russian.
Do your research before whining about Americans and our role in WW2 and dont ever forget that while we WERE there saving your butts, we were also in a very hellish war with the Japanese, something the English forgot about after their surrender in Singapore.

edit:
As far as the OP's original point. Youre throwing together a bunch of BS.. yea were responsible for Pol Pot killing millions and responsible for Saddam gassing and killing his own people.. not likely
We didnt even really support Saddam until he invaded Iran and even then we really only gave him satellite intel of Iranian troop movements. If we gave him so many weapons, then why were all of them using T-62's and Ak's, which of course comes from, who else but Russia.
And just look at how many have died at the hands of the British Empire in, over the last few hundred years.




[edit on 8/8/2007 by Kr0n0s]

Originally posted by Kr0n0s
As far as the OP's original point. Youre throwing together a bunch of BS.. yea were responsible for Pol Pot killing millions and responsible for Saddam gassing and killing his own people.. not likely

So you're saying that they would have gotten into power and etc had it not been for US intervention? Feel free to actuallyrefute my sources, and perhaps bring in some of your own...

And just look at how many have died at the hands of the British Empire in, over the last few hundred years.

I've already addressed, over and over, why this thread is about the US, and not the rest. I actually wish I had the time to do a full analysis on the British Empire tho. I trust that most Brit's are as perspectiveless on the evil empire issue like over here, and BritainEmpire is important perspective for US as well as the US is the offspring of such.
It seems that people within empires have little concept, because it's the "nature" of the system we're all products of. I've even talked to Russians who hadn't even thought of the US as the global hegemonic power that it is, because it's "normal".


[edit on 8-8-2007 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

I think that any accounting of how may people the United States has killed over the years should also have a "plus" column, that totals up the number of people the United States has saved via its massive foreign aid services, disaster relief corps, and the strength of its market, that has allowed rapid advances in technology, pharmacology, agriculture, and so on.

Dead people are easy to count, even though it may be difficult to determine exactly what led to their deaths. People are destined to die, after all. Who's to say if they would have lived longer had the U.S. not existed?

In any event, it's a lot harder to come up with a number for the people saved by their contact or association with the U.S., because they're still alive! And it would be very difficult to estimate the total number of people (and their offspring) who would have otherwise been killed had it not been for the timely intervention of the United States, either militarily or socio-economically. Billions, maybe?

The argument is completely spurious, then, even as an intellectual exercise, since it hypothesizes the outcome of an alternate, non-existent past.

I really dont care that much about your sources, i didnt even read them, nor do i care enough to find my own sources.
All I know is that right now doggin' the US and it's citizens is "The Thing To Do"
Whys that? because we said enough to terrorism.
I may not agree with everything we decided to do or the way we went about doing it but at least someone stood up and said ENOUGH, along with a few other of our allies.
As bad as terrorism was getting I still cant believe that more Nations didnt then and still havent done the same thing.
Anyway, there are many Nations that have blood on their hands, a lot more than the US, that didnt seem to bother people for the last half of the 20th century when we were considered the beacon of hope and freedom.
Im sure you dont agree with that either but history and the thousands of people that immigrated here during that time proves you wrong.

Btw, suicidevirus makes some good points in the above post.

[edit on 8/8/2007 by Kr0n0s]

Originally posted by SuicideVirus

In any event, it's a lot harder to come up with a number for the people saved by their contact or association with the U.S., because they're still alive! And it would be very difficult to estimate the total number of people (and their offspring) who would have otherwise been killed had it not been for the timely intervention of the United States, either militarily or socio-economically. Billions, maybe?

Most, if not all, US interventions have come down decidedly on the side of plutocracy and autocracy, rather than on the side of democracy and social change/betterment.

Advances in big agri-business have destroyed whole tropical regions, as the forrests have been slashed to make way for commercial crop exports. Forcing indegnious tribes and peoples into shanty town and slums, and into lives of crime, drugs, and prostitution.

Though you are correct, it is hard to count who has been saved by US intervetion and empire. Im sure US leaders can count on the applause of many rich barons, robbers, drug runners, plutocrats and dictators.

Kr0n0s:
No one is doggin the US or its citizenry. It has been said a number of times in this thread (from my memory) that it is US leaders that persue such policies of intervention that end in utter misery for the citizens of the world. If you believe people pick on the US and its policies, maybe thats because there are real concerns and gripes with such policies? Why is it not possible for you to see that US intervention has not helped to poor masses as it is said to help?

As for your terrorism remark, well, US leaders have employed dirty tacktics and terrorism in dozens of countries and interventions, and that is a matter of historical fact. Will US leaders also attack themselves for such tactics? Will the eliminate any policies which mirror international terrorism? I doubt it.

Originally posted by SuicideVirus
I think that any accounting of how may people the United States has killed over the years should also have a "plus" column, that totals up the number of people the United States has saved via its massive foreign aid services, disaster relief corps, and the strength of its market, that has allowed rapid advances in technology, pharmacology, agriculture, and so on.

Assumptions like that are easy to make when we've been bombarded our entires lives with "how good we are", while hardly ever hearing a peep like what I've done here. The reactions in this very thread clearly demonstrate the illusion we've all been fed. The big story her eisnt even that number, instead it's the concept that we're all fed a big fantasy illusion by the entire system.

Originally posted by KonigKaos
Anothr horrible post by yet another Anti-American!]

`````````````````````````````
Please read ABOUT ATS: Warnings for one-line or short responses

www.abovetopsecret.com...



[edit on 13/5/07 by masqua]

It would be anti-american to refrain from looking at those we killed in the name of "Freedom".

Draw your own conclusion, but its skewed if you think we aren't wrong for it. Killing solves nothing, it only leads to upset parents and vengeful children, along with the only thing it does create; Hate. My first choice is Fear, but who would want to strike fear into the hearts of women and children?

Gee dubbya. That's who.

Wonder if he will really give up office next year?

Freedom of Speech; gotta love it while you can cause it will be gone all too soon.

-Knight

Originally posted by laiguana
More like 27,000,000 terrorists ... Go USA!

The mention of the USA strikes terror into millions.
Invasions. Secret government testing of biological weapons on it's own citizens. Slaughter of thousand of innocents. The U.S has done all the terrorist handbook has to offer.

Originally posted by Doc Velocity
27 million is lightweight compared to the 40 million+ legally aborted human beings flushed down the toilet in America since the fraudulent Roe v Wade case made abortion legal nationwide in the 1970s. Think about it... 40 million human beings erased as a matter of personal convenience. And, yes, I said convenience, as the overwhelming majority (97%) of abortions in this country are performed to "correct" the poor decisions made by sexually active females. Those abortions performed to "save the mother's life" or performed in the instances of rape and incest comprise a very lowly 3% of all abortions in the USA.

If this isn't genocide, what is?

Doc Velocity

Without abortion that's another 40 million unwanted and in the future possibly uncared for kids spat out onto the street of your beautiful country. Accidents happen and it's not fair to label a child 'an accident' after it is born and then treat it like #. When was the last time you had an unwanted human living inside of you. You would get rid of it aswell.

You could easily make an argument that the Sun has killed millions of people, too, and just like America, there are also people in the "plus" column, who wouldn't have lived or been born if it wasn't there.

Or how about blaming China for all the people ever killed by gunpowder.



[edit on 3-12-2007 by Nohup]

the world needs a master why not the grat U.S.A most other countries do worst atrocities and others if given the power would do worse (Iran with Nukes)

Originally posted by powerbomb1123
the world needs a master why not the grat U.S.A most other countries do worst atrocities and others if given the power would do worse (Iran with Nukes)

Are you having a laugh? The USA as my master.... pfft and indeed pffffttt...

From what I've basically gathered on the last few pages here is that America has the right to do what it wants to whoever it wants, because it saved Europe in WWII...

Yeah that makes a lot of sense....

Why on earth would we want a politically corrupt, war mongering, fast food guzzling, oil burning nation as our 'master'...

The world has existed without masters for centuries and centuries and then suddenly the new kid on the block wants a bit of power....

Give me a break.

"fast food guzzling"

you don't like fast food. The rest of the world does. Would you rather have China or Russia being in charge of the world or maybe some barbaric African dictator.

Originally posted by powerbomb1123
the world needs a master why not the grat U.S.A most other countries do worst atrocities and others if given the power would do worse (Iran with Nukes)

To the bolded: Can you name the countries, the leaders, and the atrocities those leaders committed, that you believe are/were worse than anything the US has done?



[edit on 3-12-2007 by InSpiteOf]