Most violent country in entire modern history of civilization? To wipe out humanity?

page: 2
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 10:54 PM
link   


What is the most violent country in entire modern history of civilization?



mryoungscholar.com...

Read or don't I am sure someone won't




posted on Dec, 14 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by minnow
Guess there's inst any most violent *country* on Earth, in the history of civilization, afterall?

(Cuz nobody proposed an answer)



As a matter of national policy, probably the Mongolian Empire was the most effectively and consistently violent, as they used near total-genocide as a usual strategy. I don't know enough to know what their personal ideology or emotional makeup was. Did they just do this because they didn't care and wanted to win, or did they do this because they could and they hated people who were different?

When you want to talk about "most violent" nation, I believe it means you must have a national power and will whose ideology is concentrated on violence, and you compare the amount of violence inflicted vs the opportunity to inflict such violence, and the lack of remorse and maybe even the pleasure in extermination. It's not just numbers---violence in mobs and civil wars though brutal is not the quite the same as directed extermination. On this, it is very difficult for me to consider anything in the last 400 years which tops the German and Japanese fascism. Perhaps in ideology and pure viciousness Imperial Japan might have even been worse to its victims--or at least they practiced this hate for longer.

Leninist-Stalinist Communism is nearly as callously murderous and equal in its wicked achievements---but it is murderous out of a different motivation---fear, not ego. They murder or starve anybody who might be considered a threat, no matter how paranoid, insane, or remote the justification. But it did have some universalist ideology---bringing Communism to the worldwide masses was considered a virtue (and screw those who didn't care to drink the koolaid)---they didn't mass murder people because they were unworthy of deserving Communism, the way fascists viewed their opponents and victims as less than human and not even deserving the consideration of an animal.

Typical stone-age tribes find 30-40% of males dying from violence and not natural causes. This isn't any one burst but just an accumulation of humans in the primitive state---and this pattern probably has been the case for hundreds of 'nations'/'countries'/'civilizations'.
edit on 15-12-2012 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 15-12-2012 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 





Bad form.

Poor form.
2nd.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by minnow

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Err..... I'm curious about a basic point of your premise. How are you coming up with the numbers? As I know them, Stalin is good for 20 Million people in his own right and Mao is good for at least 40 million more. That's dead, of course.

20th Century Death Tolls

If there are figures that show the US exceeds 40 million people total, let alone under one leadership, I'd be interested in seeing them?


Not sure why you need a figure on number of people, rather than number of countries?

Show me a map of multiple continents Mao or Stalin perpetrated genocide across.

Last I checked, if one wiped out solely one nationality, there would still be the rest of humanity. Which is the problem with America clearly it has wiped out tens of millions of native Americans, then tens of milions of humans across Mideast, then Asia.. where next? Beside, Mao and Stalin... where are they now? LOL

Are you saying Stalin or Mao perpetrated global extermination?
edit on 14-12-2012 by minnow because: (no reason given)


Oh, I see... In other words, you really have no idea how many people America might be guilty of killing in any location, anywhere in the world. Not specifically...but you're sure it must be 10's of millions.

Well.. We KNOW it's 50-60 million between Mao and Stalin. The document I led the replies off with a link to shows that number with exhaustive citation to a mind numbing number of sources to each number listed. They don't count though? It has to be certain geographic regions now and a certain number of them?


Ooookay. Do you have any other preconditions to accepting replies from folks or is this just a cause to find America the answer to the topic question at any cost?

When you have facts to support your claim of 10's of millions killed by American forces? I'll be interested.... Until then? This sounds a whole lot like a baseless bash America thread to me and that trend is getting old without at least bad evidence to support it... You seem to offer no evidence at all beyond your own opinion.



Oh..and a side note. RT is a news organization wholly owned by the Government of the Russian Federation. It's owned by an umbrella corp that is owned by the Government directly. Very much like Voice of America is owned by the U.S. Government. The difference is that I don't see anyone holding VOA up as some authority about the internal affairs of other nations America isn't necessarily friendly with. Russia has many motives to stir the pot of unrest in the U.S.. Payback alone would be enough, given the time frames of the man running the nation.

Point being.... Using RT as a source for stories which involve the internal matters of the United States is like using VOA to learn about the Internal matters of Iran. It's just kinda laughable.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 06:32 PM
link   
It is a stupid question to ask

You could give Rwanda a shout, Cambodia, China, UK, Mexico, South Africa, all depending on how you frame your question and what parameters you use.

The thing with the US, and I believe the US should butt out of other countries, is that they have the most powerful and advanced /technologically superior military in the world- and have done for some time.

So how can you compare the US, with all those capabilities, with Rwanda for example, where those citizens still managed to murder 1 million people in 3 months using the most rudimentary of weapons?



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Credenceskynyrd
It is a stupid question to ask

You could give Rwanda a shout, Cambodia, China, UK, Mexico, South Africa, all depending on how you frame your question and what parameters you use.

The thing with the US, and I believe the US should butt out of other countries, is that they have the most powerful and advanced /technologically superior military in the world- and have done for some time.

So how can you compare the US, with all those capabilities, with Rwanda for example, where those citizens still managed to murder 1 million people in 3 months using the most rudimentary of weapons?


There is NO framing in this thread.

Its a bashing thread, pure and simple.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 06:54 PM
link   
I'll have to take your word on TV coverage. I literally haven't had a TV running in this back room now for a couple weeks and it's been good. Now, in this tragic event, I've come to realize just how much WORSE the media actually makes something that needs no effort to make it worse, to be sure. In these events, "If it bleeds, it leads" isn't just a motto and tag line to guide journalism......it's a race to the bottom.

Society WANTS IT, is the worst thing. The channels that don't deliver enough tragedy and detail get turned off for ones that are delivering. So, I believe we find ourselves watching a general race to the bottom in how events are covered and how brutally the coverage itself can add to the negative impact of the event.

I listened to Radio Reference feeds as it happened and I've been reading the reports of events in as matter of fact a way as I can find it. That has painted a picture of a truly tragic and really, evil event. There have been worse. Things like the Beslan School Massacre. There are things equal, like the Amish School House shootings in 2006. However, these are rare and very few....Thank God. I personally pray the frequency fades as mysteriously as it's picked up.

At some point, I really do have to also wonder how aware the shooters are and how motivated they have become, whether the surviving ones admit it or not, by the media coverage and raging attention they tend to get on these events. It's something I've wondered for several years now. Perhaps if every event didn't make super-stars of infamy out of every shooter as much as a rightful memorial to each victim.......some wouldn't consider the outcome worth it? Who knows.... It's all so senseless.



posted on Dec, 15 2012 @ 07:05 PM
link   
If you think that's bad, just wait till we get our Death Star.





top topics
 
6
<< 1   >>

log in

join