Says the man who killed people and did so paid by the tax payer.
Printable View
Says the man who killed people and did so paid by the tax payer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Oh....... NOW i get it. Man, I'm sorry I've been wrong all this time. It wasn't just Jews that were exterminated by the millions. It was other ethnic groups and races as well. Well that makes ALL the difference. I guess the holocaust wasn't that bad after all. Whew! Thanks for setting me straight.
It is factual then. I didn't lie at any point. Apology please.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Oh....... NOW i get it. Man, I'm sorry I've been wrong all this time. It wasn't just Jews that were exterminated by the millions. It was other ethnic groups and races as well. Well that makes ALL the difference. I guess the holocaust wasn't that bad after all. Whew! Thanks for setting me straight.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfIt is factual then. I didn't lie at any point. Apology please.Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Oh....... NOW i get it. Man, I'm sorry I've been wrong all this time. It wasn't just Jews that were exterminated by the millions. It was other ethnic groups and races as well. Well that makes ALL the difference. I guess the holocaust wasn't that bad after all. Whew! Thanks for setting me straight.
I'm sorry I haven't been able to convince you that I'm right.
Well nothing says capitulation like resorting to ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
I have never killed someone. You have.Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlieWell nothing says capitulation like resorting to ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Fact.
None of which is relevant hence ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI have never killed someone. You have.Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlieWell nothing says capitulation like resorting to ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Fact.
1: appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect
2: marked by or being an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made
Read between the lines. I am saying that you are a brainwashed killer. You are so far over the line that you don't even know your own history. The world sees American history far better than Americans do themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlieWell nothing says capitulation like resorting to ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Miles you have clearly not read any of my posts in which everyone of your assertions are refuted. Always with the hyperbole, oy vey, Israel does not bring up the holocaust everyday. You are not interested in debate, facts, or history.
You are repeating yourself. Have you ever done any humanitarian work? Have you ever saved anyones life?Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI have never killed someone. You have.Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlieWell nothing says capitulation like resorting to ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Fact.
Israel constantly brings up the holocaust. It is a shock when Netanyahu doesn't bring up the holocaust. It is the same old 45 played over and over.
It is not my job to write history books for Victor Charlie either. It is not my responsibility that he has killed people hunting for 'terrorists' or learned history through a modern American ideological stance. It tends to be a case of justifying ones owns misdemeanors.
I've paid my taxes and avoided killing foreigners. I would never work in a holocaust camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzYou are repeating yourself. Have you ever done any humanitarian work? Have you ever saved anyones life?Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI have never killed someone. You have.Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlieWell nothing says capitulation like resorting to ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzWho are " you people" ? Homosexuals? Jews? Myself and Miles? Anyone who doesn't kiss your bottom? All of the above?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Yes... you found me out. I'm a homophobe. How did I keep that secret so long? I explained things clearly in a previous post. One civil response. If it's met with insults... I resort to bitch slapping. It's the only treatment that seems to work with some of you people.
No, no, yes, no, and no.
;)
So you have a limited supply of civility and take issue with any post that does not suck up to your interpretation of the facts. Even when others reply in a strictly non personal way you take it as an insult. I am struggling for example to understand how the term Bitch slapping can mean anything other than you think it is either ok to slap women, or that it's ok to slap gays , unless of course you are a women or gay man yourself. Fag? You sound like Mars or VD.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzQuote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by GreenbeanzWho are " you people" ? Homosexuals? Jews? Myself and Miles? Anyone who doesn't kiss your bottom? All of the above?Quote:
Originally Posted by TitoFanQuote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
Yes... you found me out. I'm a homophobe. How did I keep that secret so long? I explained things clearly in a previous post. One civil response. If it's met with insults... I resort to bitch slapping. It's the only treatment that seems to work with some of you people.
No, no, yes, no, and no.
;)
So you have a limited supply of civility and take issue with any post that does not suck up to your interpretation of the facts. Even when others reply in a strictly non personal way you take it as an insult. I am struggling for example to understand how the term Bitch slapping can mean anything other than you think it is either ok to slap women, or that it's ok to slap gays , unless of course you are a women or gay man yourself. Fag? You sound like Mars or VD.
Do me a favor it you would. Go back and read posts 1 and 2.
And no... I don't think it's ok to slap women, but you're welcome to believe that because as usual you pick on specific phrases and come to your own biased conclusions.
I apologise for being rude to VanChilds. However, there is something I find unfathomable in choosing to become a killing machine for an immoral global power. It is something like signing up for the SS. As an intelligent and able person, that is the vocation one chooses? I guess I have never got my head around it. I like him really, but think he should be better than that. However, I should be better too and there is no need to be rude. I was rude and off topic and so apologise.
No need to apologize Miles but you calling me a killer has kind of become your default response when I point out your version of American history is not factually correct.
Are you suggesting that genocide did not take place in North America? In terms of numbers killed the wiping out of the native Americans was easily comparable to the holocaust. That isn't controversial. Disease and murder wiped out the natives and likewise the same happened in Nazi concentration camps to those encarcerated. Most didn't die in gas chambers, hunger or illness got them first. The mass wiping out of a race is genocide and the fact is that invaders killed an awful lot of indigenous people.
If we agree that genocide is a systematic extermination of one group by another and that most of the Native Americans in what is now the US died of disease before the US was even a country then I don't think it fits the definition and not even close to being similar to the holocaust. There is no comparison between disease killing people held in a concentration camp and epidemics sweeping through a civilization over decades. I asked you to provide a source backing up the claim of millions of Native Americans murdered and you couldn't. As I stated military leaders are not only likely to keep count of dead enemy but are prone to inflate those numbers. If a we had killed a million Indians it should be a pretty easy stat to back up. Instead of answering this you resorted to bringing up my profession which is completely irrelevant to the topic and underlies your complete lack of factual information. This has become a pretty standard response for you when your mis-informed pre-conceived notions about the US are challenged. There really is no comparing the two events at all. Even the timelines fall short. Does the herding of entire ethnic group into concentration camps for forced labor and murder over a 10 year period really sound similar to the de-population of a continent's natives over 500+ years from diseases brought by Europeans that for the most part indigenous people never actually saw and to a exponentially lower part military conquest even remotely sound similar? Your attempt to compare this to the holocaust is offensive to the victims of it and my own Native American heritage.
You are in denial. A holocaust is a holocaust. It doesn't matter if it is long or short. If you round people up in camps, murder them, allow them to get sick and die, then you have a holocaust. It is just that the American holocaust was a very long one and was perpetrated by Europeans prior to the land theft becoming America. Estimates on the the numbers of deaths vary author to author. High estimates go up to 100 million and more, others are much lower at several million. Personally, I would argue somewhere in the middle and perhaps somewhat lower than that. 250,000 remaining out of even a population of even 10 million is still a huge decline and disease was the main culprit, but there was a horrendous amount of bloodshed involved and I think a lot of Americans don't like to look in the mirror because the truth is just too ugly. As an Englishman I feel the same way. Many Americans really are English.
Look I even found a video calling the genocide a holocaust. I think I will watch it actually.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gTrbVf6SrCc
I bet VC has never forced someone to learn english....Imperialist!!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by GandalfI have never killed someone. You have.Quote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlieWell nothing says capitulation like resorting to ad hominem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
Fact.
My mother is 1/4 Cherokee, my ancestors were on the Trail of Tears and I have a BA in History but clearly I'm in denial and Miles the bigoted foreigner has the more clear perspective on the US. By his definition the black plague and any protracted military engagements between differing ethnicities are synanamous with holocaust.
Some times people rely so much on "book smarts" their common sense withers up and diesQuote:
Originally Posted by VictorCharlie
I have a BA in History and Politics too, I don't see what that proves. I am sure plenty of learners learn more about history away from their ideologically accepted lecture halls. I certainly have. Having Indian blood is irrelevant to the argument unless you were actually partaking in events from 200 years ago. Otherwise, it is just a distraction.
What I do maintain is that invasion, slaughter, concentration camps and the subsequent murder by gun or illness inflected by purpose or accident count towards the genocide. The black plague was a plague alone. It wasn't also based around invasion, massive land theft and massacres of largely indigenous people. Quite different.
You fail to support your argument and resort to ad hominem but me pointing out that I have a much deeper connection to the Native American issues in my country's history and I'm the distraction? The millions that died from the black plague brought by rats in boats were as random as the millions that died in North America from disease brought by European explorers. Neither being genocide or comparable to the Holocaust.
I have no reason to support anything. A Google search will provide you with a list of different authors and their various estimates. I don't need to convince anyone of any of this. It's too obvious.
Also, the argument that the native indian issue is closer to you personally is a bit silly. Maybe for your ancestors who were living in difficult times and experiences hardship, but you here today? It's like me saying my grandfathers experiences in WW2 bring me closer to the experience of war. Of course it does not. My own personal reading does.
Masscres, concentration camps, ethnic cleansing, people dying from hunger and starvation. I struggle to see how this was not comparable to the holocaust. The issue you have is with timescale and disease, but most concentration camp members would die because of hunger and disease. Then of course you factor in those murdered and you have a horrendous catastrophe. It was genocide and in terms of scale you can easily compare it the holocaust.
The black plague is a strange argument to make because it really was just about disease. There was no invasion, no massacres, no slaughtering etc. Quite distinct. The North America genocide was far more similiar to the holocaust than the Black Plague. US history likes to downplay the crimes involved in creating America. It is understandable, but it is also untrue. We speak of Hitler and Nazi Germany in far more derogatory terms and yet the very invents that inspired Hitler originated in North America. What better way to deal with a group of people? The connection should be made because the parallels are quite obvious. The concentration camp is not a German concept.
You stated that the US has murdered millions of Native Americans. No historian supports this adding to your long list of ignorance on most things American.
I take great pride in my heritage and it is important to me to know my family's history. We have written accounts from our ancestors that took part in the Trail of Tears. As usual you have never lived on or visited this country, been to a reservation or probably even met a tribes member but feel that you are more informed on the topic. You read selected works on the US. I live it.
The most basic failure of your analogy is that most of the Native American deaths from disease had already happened before conquest was even a thought. The first explorers had no idea they were exposing the Natives to diseases they had no immune defenses to and being explorers or refugees in small groups surely weren't intending to use this as a setup for military conquests a hundred + years later. The crux of genocide is a systematic intent. The deaths from European disease in North America were as random as the ones from the Black Plague. Both lacked an intent to kill a group or a systematic methodology.
By the time the colonials and later Americans were engaging the Native Tribes in military action the native population had been ravaged by disease for 100 years. The deaths from these conquests are no where near the Holocaust numbers and more importantly are no different than any other deaths from any other wars of that time.
You are being a bit absurd here. Chomsky puts the estimated population of old America as between 12 and 15 million. Of those that remained once the entire land mass had been stolen were 250,000 and that is not a small decline. He readily calls it genocide as do many. Disease and hunger were factors, but likewise, those were factors in the holocaust. The other obvious factors were outright murder, massacres and concentration camps. The severity of which easily brings forth comparisons to Hitler's Germany. The history of America is a sordid and brutal one. It doesn't matter if I have been to a reservation or not. Historically they were forced on the population and conditions were deplorable. Many died from hunger and illness in such conditions and this is what happened in concentration camps in Germany. The model was taken from the North America approach to the indigenous problem. You might live in America, but that is not really an argument. You have never lived the life of a 19th century Indian.
The crux of genocide is 'systemic intent' is you suggest, but the Nazi's wanted people to use as labour. The death by processes such as disease or hunger was not necessarily intentional and thus explains the vast bulk of lives lost in the holocaust. The same thing happened to Native Indians in North American concentration camps. Settlers waged a war that took place over a handful of centuries and on the way wiped out most of the population. It is pretty unprecendented behaviour.
We are going round in circles on this one now. My take that the treatment is comparable to Nazi Germany is something you dispute, but what is far less contentious is the fact that genocide was commited. Killing all Indians was the aim of numerous politicians and militiamen and they almost succeeded in wiping them out once the land grab had been completed.
Miles your racist diatribe is becoming tiresome you are continuing to deny the holocaust with silly talk of it being the result of forced labour and not systematic murder. Your reputation for being somehow intellectually astute here on this forum is laughable. You are a joke. Everything you say is opinion not rational, considered or factual. You claim that history students learn more away from academic institutions and then dismiss Victor and his families real world experiences because you actually have no interest in Native Americans or their plight they are like the Palestinians a convenient stick with which to beat those you see as the enemy. The fact that you are despite marrying a South Korean still not a fluent speaker of the language and are still happy to take advantage of a countries hospitality, and teach students English says quite a lot about you.
I don't deny the holocaust, it occured. But holocaust is an old word and does not speak for the Hitler extermination process alone. It only became about the Jews from the 1960's onwards. In fact all you do here is jump into a thread and offer a bunch of insults. What is the point in that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
I have learned a lot more about history on my own than on a university course. It isn't an outlandish suggestion. One needn't have been to university to read books, newpapers and journals. As for suggesting what my interests might be, then you are just making presumptions. You do not know my motivations. Wrong is wrong and feel it fair to argue when I feel like doing so. It doesn't matter if VC is 1/8th Indian, he is from a more civilised age, and has never experienced the hardship that they did.
And excuse me? Your final points are disgraceful. You have no idea idea what Korean abilities I possess and am a permanent resident here. Hospitality doesn't come into it, this is my home and I am no guest. A language component is typically part of the process. What does that have to do with anything anyway? You are just a bored individual looking to fence with insults. I find that boring.
You are a feeble man to just jump into a thread casting insults despite having nothing to add. You make assumptions that really have no merit. Just nonsensical. We read history in books. Genetics are genetics. I have certainly never learned much about life from my own dead relatives of 100 years ago and likely neither have the vast majority of us. Most die in relative silence.
:OhNo:
:vd:
:ghost:
You've soured my mood now. There are numerous books on the subject. Stannards book American Holocaust gives extremely harsh numbers and documents in depth the brutality and slaughter of an ethnic group. What do I have to gain by stating that an entire group was almost eradicated. Do I get satisfaction from that? No, it appalls me and it is my reaction to those distressing feelings that compels me. My logic and rationale comes from relatively straightforward moral truisms. You cannot say one action is not comparable to another action when both involved starvation, illness and slaughter. The comparisons are too obvious.
I have made my statements and they can be supported by the writings of others who have done the proper research. To find books and titles, Amazon and Google are good friends.
I cannot share what I read on my Kindle and am a bit lazy, but found here a suitable extract from Stannard that shows the brutality of what occured. It is just appalling and modern America was founded on one of the most brutal of holocausts/genocides. America is a country founded on notions of racial superiority and slavery. These are not controversial statements. Religion and intellectualism was and is a tool for enhancing power and control and if that means slaughtering people then that is what they do. It continues to happen apace today, though not in North America as the goal was largely achieved.
American Holocaust Sex, Race and Holy War
Arguments are going around in circles now and others are just jumping in to be cretins, so will quieten down. I don't claim that North America is special, but there are certainly a number of events in history that can be classed as holocausts themselves and the holocaust was not a Jewish phenomenon. It is not racist to say that Jews were only part of a wider program of labour and eventually annihilation.
Miles if you look on page ONE of the thread you will see how in posts 6 and 8 I refuted your silly, childish and offensive opinions. The holocaust is not some political football to idly kick around in an effort to score points. You did not have the decency to respond because you like Chomsky have an agenda. You are ranting with no forethought, your claims can not be given credence because you are not engaging in a discussion. You call a country your home and then claim you have not learned to speak its language fluently, that speaks volumes.
There is nothing silly or childish in discusing holocaust revisionism and there is certainly nothing wrong with saying that too much time is given to the holocaust rather than of equally important events including North America and beyond.Quote:
Originally Posted by Greenbeanz
I don't have an agenda. As always I see abuse of power and want to get to the heart of things. To point out the blatant wrong in abuse. Unfortunately with these kinds of history we have all kinds of numbers bandied around by many.
I speak Korean to medium level of comprehension, hardly fluent in any meaningfull way, but better than many. Irrelevant really.
I don't even need to ask miles anymore about America, I already know he assumes the worst of the nation, the people, and the culture. Why that is the case is a bit curious, he seems to believe it's the sophisticated liberal intellectual elite view and that is true those people who preach their gospel of white guilt see America as the great evil in the world. It's not a matter of defeating Facism or Communism or anything, it's about rising to a level of power so high that we "must have cheated" in order to have obtained it and the cries of how "unfair" things are will continue until the end.
Lyle you treated those good human beings with no respect and wanted them dead to the last. Your own politicians admitted as much. It is as simple as that. It is simple called immoral bad behaviour, which are moral truisms.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
These threads have a way of going round and round. No one ever convinces anyone else of anything, and just about everyone is incapable of ever saying "You know... you might have a point".
Miles, keep on living in your fantasy land. Words are words. Look up the meaning of "genocide" in the dictionary... and you can very well apply it to the killing of American Indians during the colonization of America. But you can also use it to describe just about any war, or violent conflict where masses of people of a specific race or ethnic group die. Words are words.
Bottom line is this: Nazi Germans lined up Jews (yes... and other unfortunate souls who were born inferior according to Hitler) by the millions, and herded them single file into gas chambers. Four million... one million... whatever. There were a BUNCH of senseless deaths. If lowering the number down to one million makes you feel better, knock yourself out. These human beings were not in battle... they were not armed. They were so many men, women and children who were summarily exterminated.
By contrast, the American Indians, as has been explained to you half a dozen times at least, died over the course of many, many years. Many died in battle... many died of disease. To compare one event with the other is beyond stupidity. And whether you admit it or not, all your arguments carry this tired, old agenda you've been pushing since Day One, about the U.S. being this evil empire and whatnot. I have tried to use reason with you, admitting that the U.S.'s international policies are not always correct... and they tend to intervene where they don't belong. I've even agreed that the use of drones does more harm than good (when you put things in their proper perspective). But to no avail. To you, anyone who doesn't believe in this "evil empire" shit like you do, is not worth arguing with.
So carry on.
Ok and were those feelings out of the ordinary for other cultures of the same times?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gandalf
For starters Chomsky is neither a respected historian on American Indians or a paleontologists so he is no more an authoritarian on the subject than your or I. I know you have a man-crush on him but unless we are talking linguistics his opinion is no different than Bilbos. I can't respond to your link b/c it wouldn't work for me.
Regarding your reponse to Lyle: The Indians were no better than the Europeans. They enslaved, raped, and destroyed other tribes. The only reason the Indians helped the English settlers was purely strategic and political, they offset the power of the dominant tribe of the region. The oppressed tribes of Mexico supported the Conquistadores for the same reasons. Indians weren't noble, they weren't holier than the Europeans, they did the exact same things for the exact same reasons. Just that the Europeans were better at it, and they learned by having it done to them. The US perpetuated some pretty horific things on the Natives but not really that different then what tribes did to other tribes and all in all was pretty par for the field regarding how victors treated losers at the time.
Since you started this by comparing the two then lets finish it that way. The Holocaust was a sytematic rounding up of European Jews and other less desirables by Nazi Germany to work in forced labor camps and/or death camps with the "final solution" being extermination of the race. Many Jews were flat out murdered as well as dying of disease and malnutrition in the camps. The process was not only continued but accelerated as the war wound down even to the detriment of the Nazi War effort.
North American exploration (excluding Viking colonies in the far north) is often thought to have started with Columbus but John Cabot was probably the first to actually land on what we now call the US in 1497 but his actual point of landing is disputed. In the early 16 century a slew of explorers land on the US East and Gulf Coasts. Over the first century and a half after Columbus's voyages, the native population of the Americas (North, South and Central) plummeted by an estimated 80% (from around 50 million in 1492 to eight million in 1650) mostly by outbreaks of old world diseases. The Smallpox History of the World states "Epidemics of smallpox (1518, 1521, 1525, 1558, 1589), typhus (1546), influenza (1555,diptheria (1614) and measles (1615 swept ahead of initial European contact,[killing between 10 million and 20 million people, up to 95% of the indigineous population of the Americas."So by the time the first lasting colony (James Town) was established in 1607 the process of de-population in North America was in full swing. There were about a dozen major conflicts during the colonial period some of which were perpetrated by the tribes on the colonials such as the Indian Massacre of 1622 where the indians were welcomed into homes and then massacred over 300 people. Most were different tribes working with colonials to attack rivals or ingratiate themselves with the Europeans. The US was involved in around 40 different military conflicts with Indian Tribes between 1775 and 1918. Many of these were ugly conflicts with atrocities on both sides and I'm also not going to try to sugar coat the treatment of defeated tribes some of which were handled with compassion and some of which were horrendous.
If you read these two descriptions (I admit over simplified a bit) and feel that they are similar then ok but I feel that is a representation of your lack of objectivity when discussing the US versus a well versed opinion.
Noam Chomsky is a pompus dick......and soon he will die ;)