How Much Blood is on Your Hands? See how you score!

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow


wow... humm, since I have a very definite vibe that you are at least partially leftwing let's try to do this and see what you think.

Socialist/communist dictatorships around the world are responsible for the murders of more people than all the large wars, and conflicts not associated with socialism/communism put together.

In a nutshell, over 110 million people so far have been murdered in the past 80 years alone by socialist/communist dictatorships. That's not counting the millions put in gulags, and in indoctrination camps to make people "good socialists/communists"...

With this understood, the Soviet Union appears the greatest megamurderer of all, apparently killing near 61,000,000 people. 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. Communist China up to 1987, but mainly from 1949 through the cultural revolution, which alone may have seen over 1,000,000 murdered, is the second worst megamurderer. Then there are the lesser megamurderers, such as North Korea and Tito's Yugoslavia.

Obviously the population that is available to kill will make a big difference in the total democide, and thus the annual percentage rate of democide is revealing. By far, the most deadly of all communist countries and, indeed, in this century by far, has been Cambodia under the Khmer Rouge. Pol Pot and his crew likely killed some 2,000,000 Cambodians from April 1975 through December 1978 out of a population of around 7,000,000. This is an annual rate of over 8 percent of the population murdered, or odds of an average Cambodian surviving Pol Pot's rule of slightly over just over 2 to 1.

In sum the communist probably have murdered something like 110,000,000, or near two-thirds of all those killed by all governments, quasi-governments, and guerrillas from 1900 to 1987. Of course, the world total itself it shocking. It is several times the 38,000,000 battle-dead that have been killed in all this century's international and domestic wars. Yet the probable number of murders by the Soviet Union alone--one communist country-- well surpasses this cost of war. And those murders of communist China almost equal it.
...

www.hawaii.edu...

If you are part of the left then you have in your hands the murders of all these people, and it is in your hands that there are still socialist/communist nations comitting atrocities even against their own people.

Most anti-war groups have ties to socialist and or communist groups, so if you are part of "the anti-war movement" then you have in your hands the blood of all these innocent people who have been murdered and were FORCED to accept, or be incarcerated for decades, or even die for not accepting the socialist/communist propaganda....

If you are part of any leftwing organization, even if in the surface they seem to help SOME people, you still have in your hands the blood of all those innocent people who have been murdered by leftwing dictatorships.

If you are leftwing, then it is in your hands the blood of all the Tibetan people who are still being murdered by the socialist/communist chinese machine, and these people are just trying to live in peace their lives.

If you are leftwing it is in your hands the fact that most of my family is still trapped behind the iron curtain of Cuba, and are suffering to no end.

If you are leftwing, and in case you didn't know, all radical islamic nations are also socialist in nature, then it is in your hands the suffering, and death caused by such radical islamic nations.

How do you like them apples?

reply to post by ElectricUniverse

There was a thread a while back that partially addresses your post.
Labels and the Box they put us in!
Your communist leaders did something similar, it appears, to what you are attempting to do to me.

Now, to make my thread comprehensible to you, you must put a label me and put me in a box. Once in this box, you can stack me with "like" people, and attribute all sorts of characteristics to me. But, you see, this only allows you to simplify me to a level you can understand. Of course, this perversion of my person does nothing to help you actually understand me, nor this thread. So, I will attempt to help you because I am a kind, compassionate soul.

I am not part of an "anti-war" group, I am anti-war. If certain people agree with my view, so be it. I am not "partially" or by any measure, "left-wing". If someone categorizes a belief of mine as left-wing, that is their right, but like any other label, it really only means something in the minds of those that like and use labels. It means nothing to me, and at most may define a single freckle on my skin.

This thread illustrates my belief that each of us have varying degrees of complicity in crimes against humanity depending upon the degree of our participation. I asked that you play, you did not. You do still have the opportunity, of course, to find what number best represents your involvement if any.

For the record, I do not assume any responsibility for the mass murders of mad men. There is no correlation, no link between my life and the lives of mass murderers, other than what is outlined in the OP.

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow

Your communist leaders did something similar, it appears, to what you are attempting to do to me.
...

Wow, you obviously didn't understand it... what you claim I am doing is EXACTLY what you have done with this thread. I was trying to make you understand that, but I guess my post must have hit a soft spot and you are becoming all defensive.

BTW, just so you know, I am not that naive to think every leftwinger is at fault for what happens in every socialist/communist dictatorship. Although you should mind that such ideology has, more often than not, lead to such situations.

Most of the so called "imperialistic wars" were fought against "socialist murderers" and their attemps at expanding socialism/communism around the world.

In my personal opinion, by living in a developed country anywhere in the world, blood is on my hands by virtue of the squalor much of the world lives in to support what even among the poorest in this nation must seem a lavish lifestyle compared to those places. So regardless of war support or opposition (I always oppose war and feel it's never justifiable, but that's me) taxes (I'm unemployed and basically disabled, and when we do have income we always get a refund) or anything else, I still feel I have blood on my hands.

Actually, I'd say we all have "blood" (metaphorically) on our hands simply by living. None of us gets out of this life without causing harm, directly or indirectly, to other human beings (to say nothing of other creatures, the environment, etc. which in turn causes indirect harm to people too, at least to varying degrees. Everything affects everything else, even if only marginally.)

It is one of the most painful and unfortunate aspects of being a living, mortal being.

reply to post by SurrealisticPillow


What a waste of a post. You should have given it the heading."Anti western propaganda" or " I hate the culture which has given me so much". Then at least it would have been a legit heading.

Oh. And I note that you're one of THOSE PEOPLE who don't have the guts to state which country you're from in your location.

You must have alot of faith in the rubbish you post.

reply to post by AceWombat04


If you are going to think that way then the mere fact that for example a family in Africa is closer to a source of water, and can drink what little water there is, then that family is the cause for the other 12 families living close by not being able to drink that same water.

Or what about the small amounts of food they eat? and they get from aid from other countries? the fact that one man was able to procure a sack of rice for his family means that it is in his hands the fact that other families won't be able to eat that rice, and in his hands is the blood from those families who died of famine?

reply to post by ElectricUniverse


In my opinion, yes. It may not be the intent (it certainly isn't mine.) But we still cause indirect harm whether we intend to or not. I'm not judging anyone for that or saying people are bad people because of it in any way. But none of us can escape life without causing harm, whether directly or indirectly. (I did use the word metaphorically with respect to "blood.")

Just my honest opinion.

Originally posted by Omphale

There is a law against torture.

Yes, there is - the Geneva Conventions. Someone should try to make the case that they have been violated.

There is a law against holding someone indefinately without trial.

Unless you can cite that law, I'll have to say no there isn't. I've never run across it any where, so toss a citation my way.

There is a law regarding the treatment of detainees.

Yes, there is - the Geneva Conventions again. I'd like to see the specific argument contending that those provisions have been violated, and how.

By acting without NATO and UN approval, the UK and the US contravened international law.

This is in error. Neither the UN nor NATO are law-making bodies. Their approval or disapproval carries exactly NO weight in legal matters.

See above. And similiarly, I don't think we have had any public commentary from the UK or US intelligence services as to their involvement in Libya, other that the report by the BBC that the UK military and intelligence forces were running insurgency training camps up to six months prior to any 'surge'.

Personally, I don't need any commentary from the intelligence services. It's a matter of public record that NATO interfered in the internal affairs of Libya by dropping bombs in support of one side of an internal conflict. In light of that, intelligence involvement is a moot point, and would be more difficult a case to make than making the case against what interference is already known and public.

Originally posted by nenothtu
It seems to me that we've got trouble enough at home, which is likely to get worse over the next year or so, and we ought to be concentrating on that, rather than poking around in other folks' internal business.

Yes. I agree. But I also have a child, and I don't want to leave this world knowing I did nothing to change it and instead stood back and watched while it slid further into the crapper, when I know I could've done something to stop it. If only I'd had the balls. But, luckily I do so I know that I will have no such worry as I face the final curtain...even if the rest of you fail to grow any...

..or I'll die trying.

I'm of the opinion that it's not my world to change. We (the US) have trouble enough at home to work on changing, and the rest of the world ought to be capable of looking out for itself for a while until we get ourselves sorted out. I've never been very big on policing the world - if it's not our problem, and can't be made our problem, then we've got no dog in that fight. Iraq was one such situation, Libya another, and Syria yet another. We had no business kicking around in any of those places when we did.

I am not here to pry, but put it this way, would you want someone to have to learn the lessons you have, in the way that you have? While it is good to look after your own, sometimes it is also good to be honest about your experiences so that others can learn from them indirectly and not simply look at you and want to be like you without understanding what it took to be you. We should be careful about sending mixed messages in the hope of it justifying our mistakes by repetition. If we have the information for cessation we should throw it out there and let it do it's work naturally.

It is only wrong if we know it is wrong. Most 16 to 18 year olds, I am sure you agree, can barely differentiate between their arses and their elbows. Do you see what I mean? Whatever mistakes, fatal, moral or otherwise, we have made that may or may not lead to our eternal damnation...does not exclude us from ensuring that the next generation do not make the same mistakes. We still have valid lessons to teach, far more valid than those that have never erred and therefore never lived.

I'm not sure I understand you here, but I think I do. Allow me to throw out a story by way of illustration. Most people who know me personally don't really know that much about my history. I'm neither Sergeant Rock nor Rambo - I'm just a tall scrawny guy among the crowds. Most know that I'm not to be trifled with, but that's more a function of my bad attitude than a function of practical demonstrations of going around tearing folks up. I just don't do that. I don't find it to be necessary in most cases. I tend to see most situations differently than other folks, and find that there are damned few that really, truly, call for direct action, where other folks will just jump.

My son, however, does know some of my history. He spent his childhood wanting to be "just like dad", and always had intentions of joining the service (which I did not do, by the way - but it was the only way he could figure out to get himself on to a battle field, where I HAVE been). he had visions of glory and honor and all that crap that kids think it is, which were fostered and nourished by a friend of mine who is a former Marine, feeding that fantasy. I've always discouraged all that flag waving baloney, and tried to explain to him how it really was. It's not parades and confetti, glory and honor. It's rain, and mud, and blood, and dead bodies that would look more at home in a butcher shop than they do laying in the road. Still, most of what I said didn't sink in to him in any sort of visceral way.

One evening, he wanted to watch some war movie or another, so we sat and watched it. One particular scene cut a little close to the bone, and it brought tears to my eyes. He'd never seen that happen before, ever, in his whole life.

THAT got his attention, and helped him to adjust his priorities more than all the preaching I could have ever done. That brought it home to his gut. That gave him an understanding of what it took to be me, and more importantly, perhaps, in his own words "what it took away" from me. It made him pay closer attention to the other things I said, and evaluate them in a different light.

You're right about passing on the lessons learned from mistakes. Kids WILL make enough mistakes of their own to pass on, and shouldn't have to do over again the mistakes we made, reinvent the wheel, and relearn what could have been taught less painfully. It's been said that anyone who never screws up isn't doing anything TO screw up. Everyone will make their own mistakes as they go along, and I don't think they should have to make mine, too.

Originally posted by Omphale

Sorry, 'Articles of War' was me being a bit archaic...but the fact remains, that in order to engage a country in war, that country has to have elected their leadership...this is NATO guidelines I believe. In case where there is a dictatorship, 'the people' are considered as captive or hostages of that regime, and therefore only the leadership represents a legitimate target. It is in these instances, usually, that coverts and paid mercenaries are used, as I am sure you know. But this also requires that the leadership that replaces said dictator, needs to be sympathetic to the needs of whoever funded the operation...or coup de tat as they are also sometimes called despite the obvious outside influence. Insurgency, and 'revolution; is the current preferred mode over such operations at present since society seems happy to accept large groups of people being disappeared thereby creating the necessary vacumn required to impose sympathetic rule. I gather than this method is cheaper or more effective than mercenaries, hence the change of MO. Or perhaps they really do think that we are all that easily fooled.

Ah. I wasn't aware that anything EVER makes civilians "legitimate targets". Sure, they get graunched in huge numbers, sometimes indiscriminately and sometimes they get targeted (i.e. Dresden, Hiroshima, etc), but I'd never seen any legal justification that made that "ok", As far as I'm concerned, it's never ok - but that's just me, and I don't make policy.

As an aside, I knew a fine young man that took out one of his own men for intentionally harming a civilian. Popped him right then and there, and sent him home in a bag.

Mercenaries are rarely ever used in coup d'etats. They have other, particular uses in regards to opposition "leadership", from assasination to hostage rescue, raids and associated strikes, but it's a rare thing to put men who fight for money (per the popular conception of things) in charge of replacing a government - they're as likely to seize it for themselves on your dime.

Then you'd have to hire another bunch to replace them.

Most mercenaries are employed in more mundane tasks which are physical security related or in specialized training. VERY few are actually employed in the popular sense as private armies and strike teams. That's the reality vs. the mythology.

Most coups are accomplished by intelligence services, who cultivate the new guys before eliminating the old guys. They then make the connections and liaisons, supply any special needs - such as money or equipment - and get locals to do the job for them with promises of power and the like in the new order of things.

You're probably thinking of situations like the Executive Outcomes attempt on the Seychelles a few years ago. That didn't turn out so well, eh? that's exactly why mercenaries aren't generally employed to pull off coups. That was a hare-brained scheme from the very start.

Originally posted by nenothtu
Who they vote for is immaterial in whether or not they are eligible to be be targets. Whether they shoot at someone is what decides.

Again, I agree. But, that being the case, I am also all for dropping the #ing pretense. Know what I mean?

Yeah, I get your drift. there is "legal",and there is what is actually done on the ground, and the two don't always agree.

reply to post by ElectricUniverse

Defensive? I am not defensive at all.
For whatever reason, you come to this thread and attempt to make some comparison to this thread, left-wing communist mass murderers in China and the Soviet Union, and myself for having supposed left-wing views.
You apparently disagree with the OP. Fine. But your analogy doesn't work, no matter how many words you use to try to make a connection. Individually, we have a small amount of influence in our own country, and even less on the leaders of others. It doesn't mean we can't end up with blood on our hands as I stated in the OP.
I don't care to argue the point any more than I already have, nothing defensive about it. I just find it a ridiculous assertion, that is all.

reply to post by steveknows

What gives you the idea that I hate the culture?
Great cultures are created by the people, not by governments. Governments often DESTROY great cultures.
I often hear the same drivel, "why don't you leave" or some other nonsense, as if pointing out hypocrisy is somehow unpatriotic.
People build the society they live in, good or bad, and people can destroy good societies by action or inaction.
Level 4 people love to drape themselves in the flag without ever questioning the flag. Relax, you have the strength of numbers. Why you care what country I am from is beyond me.

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by steveknows

 

What gives you the idea that I hate the culture?

Because you just bagged it by way of blowing that floppy trumpet being that the west is bad. There's no blood on my hands fella and I make no apology for my child being well fed and educated.

Great cultures are created by the people, not by governments. Governments often DESTROY great cultures.
I often hear the same drivel, "why don't you leave" or some other nonsense, as if pointing out hypocrisy is somehow unpatriotic.

That's because you just don't get it. Do you lead by example? I bet you don't. You're educated and you don't have to line up for food or tend a goat herd rather than go to school. That's what bleeding hearts don't seem to understand when blabbing on about how bad the west is. The defining difference is that the forefathers of all the western countries had greater foresight than most other cultures and that's supposed to be somehow a bad thing now.

People build the society they live in, good or bad, and people can destroy good societies by action or inaction.
Level 4 people love to drape themselves in the flag without ever questioning the flag. Relax, you have the strength of numbers.

Yes that's right and the west is under attack supported by people such as yourself. It won't stop you taking full advantage of it though. Also these crappy countries that you blame the west for must have built their own society. I'm glad you see it that way.

Why you care what country I am from is beyond me.

Of course it's beyond you because you have no understanding of the advantages you've been given by this culture you think is so bad assuming of course you actually come from the culture you're putting down. And of course not stating where you come from you could be from anywhere. You could be the educated the son of a war lord in a cave above a hill where there's goats being tended by a kid who's culture says that goat herding is more important than education and bagging on the west because your country is inherently backward for all anyone knows. It's oh so easy to bag on a culture or country when you're faceless.

reply to post by steveknows

I take it that you don't agree with the OP?

I am not "bagging" anything but the willingness of many people to go overseas and fight wars when they couldn't explain WHY. Trust me, I have asked. As for leading by example, please don't pretend to know me, you don't. You have no idea about me, and based upon your prejudices, I think you would be quite surprised.
I realized that this thread would offend some, so I welcome all unemotional, rational viewpoints that may differ from mine. But, yours is, so far, not one of those.
There are many, many articles and ATS threads on the criminality of these NATO aggressions, I don't feel compelled to prove this case, but I could. I merely bring my and your possible complicity into focus, a game you don't want to play. That is fine.

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by steveknows

 

I take it that you don't agree with the OP?

I am not "bagging" anything but the willingness of many people to go overseas and fight wars when they couldn't explain WHY. Trust me, I have asked.

Soldiers don't get to pick their wars they defend their country and it's interests. And you're correct, that's something you would never understand. Also you don't like my culture so why would I trust you?

As for leading by example, please don't pretend to know me, you don't. You have no idea about me, and based upon your prejudices, I think you would be quite surprised.

Yes that's right I do disagree with you and you don't like it which is basically what you're saying right along with your apparent belief that you should be able to bag the western culture but not have to answer for it. A bit of rational thought is a scary thing to an irrational person and one of the reactions is to throw in the prejudice card. Also going on the accusations you're making against the west and the blame you place on it shows that you somehow are disconnected from it.

I realized that this thread would offend some, so I welcome all unemotional, rational viewpoints that may differ from mine. But, yours is, so far, not one of those.

My reponse is emotional? If it was emotional I would accuse you of having blood on your hands for being part of the anti western propaganda campaign and unwitting tool of the anti western forces and sponser of every bullet that's killed a coalition troop. But I haven't. Yet by the very nature of your post you've accused me of having blood on my hands and that of every person in the western world, who of course you don't know..Who's emotional?

There are many, many articles and ATS threads on the criminality of these NATO aggressions,

An ats post is not a document. War is hell. The fog of war allowes the uneducated to make claims without being on the ground. Do you actually understand which side you're on?

I don't feel compelled to prove this case, but I could.

Correct. You've jumped on the band wagon.

I merely bring my and your possible complicity into focus , a game you don't want to play. That is fine.

Once again you're meaning that I disagree with you and you don't like it. What do you think should happen? Do you think you should be able to post an anti western thread and have everyone agree with you? Why are people so against the west the first be offended when people don't agree with them?

reply to post by steveknows

You do nothing but hurl insults.
Have a good day, Brit, I am done with you.

Originally posted by SurrealisticPillow
reply to post by steveknows

 

You do nothing but hurl insults.
Have a good day, Brit, I am done with you.

There was nothing insulting in what I said other than an apposing view which goes back to what I said about you don't like being disagreed with. Which particular truth offended you?

And I'm not a Brit. You don't understand that Australia isn't part of Britain and you apparently have no concept of geography but you claim to have such a deep understanding of the western western world..

I rest my case.

This is an absolutely stupid thread and even dumber 'test'
Who came up with it? Some dippy-hippy teenager living in their parents basement??

DUMB!!

So if you were in the military or if you worked for a defense company your hands are 'dripping in blood'? Absolutely moronic statement. There is nothing wrong with defending your country and your way of life. To say that someone is 'dripping in blood' because they believe that or work for that ....

Originally posted by FlyersFan


This is an absolutely stupid thread.

Who came up with it? Some dippy-hippy teenager living in their parents basement??

DUMB!!

So if you were in the military or if you worked for a defense company your hands are 'dripping in blood'? Absolutely moronic statement. There is nothing wrong with defending your country and your way of life. To say that someone is 'dripping in blood' because they believe that or work for that ....

Yep I think he's a kid. A few hard truths and he's taken his toys and gone home.

reply to post by steveknows

Your statement,
"There was nothing insulting in what I said other than an apposing view"

Your words....
"You must have alot of faith in the rubbish you post.
Because you just bagged it by way of blowing that floppy trumpet
Do you lead by example? I bet you don't.
That's what bleeding hearts don't seem to understand when blabbing on
Yes that's right and the west is under attack supported by people such as yourself.
Of course it's beyond you because you have no understanding
that's something you would never understand
A bit of rational thought is a scary thing to an irrational person
Do you actually understand which side you're on?
You don't understand that Australia isn't part of Britain and you apparently have no concept of geography...

Yes, no insults, just an opposing viewpoint....
Sorry for not plotting your location. Try to have a good day, Aussie.

reply to post by FlyersFan

What country are you defending? I wasn't aware that the U.S. was attacked by Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Pakistan, or Iran.
The thread is entirely accurate. You must not have a rational argument, thus you resort to childish attacks on the author?
Surely you can do better.