Freddy. Stop with your vague attacks on Curtis and other by calling them racists (especially when it is such an unfounded claim). You’re basically doing what could be considered a combination of flaming/trolling (rules 4 and 13). Consider that your official warning.
You are correct sir! Killing is killing, and its all bad.
About 1.5 million out of 7 million died in Cambodia…about 20% of its population. The 12 million that died in the Holocaust accounted for a few percent of Europe’s population. Horror was much more widespread in Cambodia than in Europe. Death and misery are the same no matter who’s dying or suffering. Genocide is genocide and its all bad.
Its not a useless statistic, but a very valuable one. The Khmer Rouge destroyed one in every five people in Camodia. The Nazis didn’t even come close. The point you keep missing (for whatever reason) was that aside from the war, most people in Germany had an alright life. Hardly anyone, even leading Khmer Rouge, had a decent life in Cambodia.
Really? I never knew that. Do you have any informative links to this information? I’d surely love to check it out.
One-half usually isn’t referred to as “a fraction”. A more accurate use of the word would be that a fraction of your post makes sense, adds to the discussion, or is an interesting read. And by a fraction, I mean something like .0045%, and not 50%.
Are you a troll like Curtis is? I’m just curious because, were it not for your lack of capitalization or punctuation, I’d say you and Curtis here seem to be the same person.
As a matter of fact, when Vietnam liberated Cambodia, the US (because of our animosity towards Vietnam) gave cash and weapons to the Khmer Rouge along with China (who supported the Khmer as a stand off to the USSR which was supporting Vietnam. This ended up turning Cambodia into a Vietnam between the Chinese and the Soviets. Pretty much what you said earlier about us not really caring is completely true. That’s why the world’s twiddling its thumbs with Sudan right now. Or why we twiddled our thumbs in Ruanda or Somalia. But when some white people started killing off some other white people in a dirty corner of Europe, they get airstrikes and NATO.
Basically, nothing. That’s why I had such a hard time understanding what happened there or why they did it. The reason given was to do away with the older, capitalistic society and go back to Year Zero and start from scratch as an agricultural utopia. Pol Pot was a college drop out and probably a great big idiot. He pretty much took the worst policies from the other Communist regimes and screwed them up even more. He had a lot of resentment for the other Communist countries and didn’t want to be caught doing what they did. He wanted to kill off imperialists, intellectuals, educated people and foreigners because they were the corrupt parts of society. He divvied everyone up into the Old People (peasants) and New People (city-dwellers and intellectuals). That was all his basic plan. Its really weird because he didn’t really have anything to gain. The country he controlled in 1977 was much worse off than it was in 1972, in the middle of a civil war. And the Khmer Rouge that did all these bad things really didn’t have anything to gain either. Usually, the Khmer Rouge was punished more severely than non-KM when they got in trouble. Pol Pot purged thousands of his own loyal followers. Its really maddening to think that something this alien and unthinkable happened just a few decades ago. Its even more maddening to think that stuff like this is going on today.
Can’t just use the blanket population of Europe. Rather, it would have to be the population of Europe under German/Italian control. Then again, you could also look at the statistic of percentage of people killed when compared to the entire Earth’s population, a figure the Nazis would “win.”
Really? I never knew that. Do you have any informative links to this information? I’d surely love to check it out.
It’s the generally accepted historical theory, given various speeches by Hitler and the aggressive war into countries like Russia and France. Then there’s plenty of political dissenters being thrown into concentration camps (marked by red triangles).
One-half usually isn’t referred to as “a fraction”. A more accurate use of the word would be that a fraction of your post makes sense, adds to the discussion, or is an interesting read. And by a fraction, I mean something like .0045%, and not 50%.
6 out of 11, out of 12, or even 26 is a fraction. Half is merely 1 out of 2. It’s a very basic fraction. As for your rather trolling comments towards Sil, they add even less discussion.
Are you a troll like Curtis is? I’m just curious because, were it not for your lack of capitalization or punctuation, I’d say you and Curtis here seem to be the same person.
Sil and Curt are most assuredly two different people. Different IPs and hostmasks, generally differing political views, etc. And Curtis never really trolled despite your rather blanket defintion.