Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Davidfak]

• <a href="https://www.port... by Davidfak
  [Yesterday at 08:59:28 PM]
• <a href="https://www.port... by Davidfak
  [Yesterday at 07:52:26 PM]
• <a href="https://www.port... by Davidfak
  [Yesterday at 01:37:16 PM]
• <a href="https://www.port... by Davidfak
  [Yesterday at 12:26:58 AM]
• cp loli by BobbyNof
  [May 06, 2024, 02:51:48 AM]
• <a href="https://www.port... by Davidfak
  [May 06, 2024, 02:47:41 AM]

Members

• Total Members: 4950
• Latest: Alexistig

Stats

• Total Posts: 129618
• Total Topics: 7184
• Online Today: 129
• Online Ever: 1013
• (January 12, 2023, 01:18:11 AM)

[Agent_Tachyon]

That is a good point, up until grade 11 or so some Canadian schools don't mention how our batshit crazy prime minister and his buddy Blair the immigration officer turned away thousands of Jews to go back Germany (most of whom went to concentration camps, though to be fair nobody knew at that point).

[ivan]

I'd say it's the same thing.

The 50 million number is probably incorrect. Around 800K deaths from executions and 2 million deaths in gulags and from famine due to relocations are documented. The highest credible undocumented number is around 20 million in all, which also includes German POWs after WWII. The 50 million number is often used in an attempt to dwarf the 6 million Jewish deaths in the holocaust. But it doesn't work that way. Six million men, women and children were not swept up and exterminated in camps under Stalin. There is no historic precedent for that kind of viciously efficient extermination of a people. There is no mitigating it.

But then, Russians are generally unimpressed by these arguments. They lost 20 million souls in WWII.

[pbsaurus]

This is from a University of Hawaii study:



Which has 61MM but only 10MM Genocide

[ivan]

Well, I don't know. Rummel is kind of a kook. Sixty million killed by repression between 1917 and 1990? Maybe. But he doesn't supply any documentation, uses non-primary sources, and has a clear political bias. Also, his statistical methodology borders on hokum. Check this out:

METHODOLOGICAL PROCEDURES
A number of procedures were used to translate estimates into tables to which calculations and consolidation could be applied, and in carrying out calculations on these estimates.

1. Translation of qualitative figures to quantitative: Estimates of those killed are not always numerically precise. The following protocols have been used to translate from such qualitative assertions to usable numbers.

1.1. If a source says that the number killed is "close to", or "just over", or "about", or "nearly X", then X is made the estimate. If this is not also said to be a low or high, or conservative, or otherwise similarly qualified, it is treated as a mid-estimate.
1.2. If a source says that X is "conservative" or "prudent", or qualifies X by "at least" or "more than", or otherwise indicates X is a low figure, then X is treated as a low. To say "no more than", "less than", "at most", or "approaches X", implies that X is a high. "As many as" is treated as suggesting a mid-estimate.
1.3. Qualitative approximations like "several thousand", or "thousands" is interpreted as a low of 2,000; a "couple of thousand" is interpreted as a mid-estimate of 2,000.
2. Filling in the range: In some cases when results are consolidated or there is only a single figure for a massacre or killing available, the range of killed may have to be approximated. An analysis of available estimates suggests that the following procedure is very conservative.


2.1. If a low and mid-value is missing, but there is high, then the high can be halved to estimate the low. If there is a low, but no mid-value and high, then the low can be doubled to get the high.
2.2. If a mid-value is available but the low is missing, then the low can be estimated as 2/3rds the mid-value; if a high is missing, it can be estimated as 1/3rd higher then the mid-value. If the contextual information suggests an average is more desirable, that is calculated for the mid-value.

Here is his rationalization for the 60 million figure (from wiki):

Most estimates of democide are uncertain and scholars often give widely different estimates. Rummel's counts 43 million deaths due to democide during Stalin's regime inside and outside the Soviet Union. This is much higher than an often quoted figure of 20 million. Rummel has responded that this is based on a figure from Robert Conquest's book The Great Terror from 1968 and that Conquest's qualifier "almost certainly too low" is usually forgotten. According to Rummel, Conquest's calculations excluded camp deaths after 1950, and before 1936; executions 1939-53; the vast deportation of the people of captive nations into the camps, and their deaths 1939-1953; the massive deportation within the Soviet Union of minorities 1941-1944; and their deaths; and those the Soviet Red Army and secret police executed throughout Eastern Europe after their conquest during 1944-1945. Moreover, the Holodomor that killed 5 million in 1932-1934 is not included.

He might have a point there, but I would have to say that under his broad definition, what we are doing in Iraq today is "democide".

[pbsaurus]

I would agree that what we are doing in Iraq is democide.  And the last estimate I heard was over 60K killed there.  Not to mention all the Iraqui's who succumbed to famine due to the economic sanctions prior to the war.

[12AX7]

Wasn't there an "Oil for Food" program so the civillians wouldn't go hun.  .  .   oh yeh.

[Demosthenes]

I'd like to state for the record that I'm 100% opposed to democide.

[pbsaurus]

Hmmm, wonder why

[xolik]

Yes, I already know I'm going to hell. No need to remind me.

[Demosthenes]

Yes, I already know I'm going to hell. No need to remind me.

Um... Is it okay for me to laugh at that?   

[pbsaurus]

Not only is it OK to laugh at it, I have quoted it in the appropriate thread.

[Demosthenes]

I meant the gif.   

[pbsaurus]

Yeah so did I.  But the people who see the quote in Hectar won't get it until they click on the quote link.

[Min]

I didn't laugh.  It made me a little uncomfortable. 

Does that mean I'm not going to hell??!?  Wehoo!

[Zephyr]

That whole scenario reeks of 1984 to me. 
Well, the erasing history part. >_>

[Rico]

I would agree that what we are doing in Iraq is democide.  And the last estimate I heard was over 60K killed there.  Not to mention all the Iraqui's who succumbed to famine due to the economic sanctions prior to the war.

Out of those 60k, how many were the result of defensive fire?  I haven't looked it up to see what the numbers are for casualties, but I bet a little analysis will find the highest number attributed to sucide bombings, followed by defensive fire.  That's a little different than hunting down people and killing them simply for their political beliefs, or associating with people who have those beliefs.  I'm not trying to offend, PB.  I just feel that your statement was purely inflamitory.  That's something I would expect from a politician or the media, not from some one intelligent.