Comparison of Sri Lanka and Tamil with other wars (Split from 20,00 Tamil killed)

[Ziggurat]

Unbelievable. I don't believe such a death toll was necessary to achieve a military victory

That's because you've become accustomed to the way the US fights wars, and so don't realize how remarkable it really is.

[Skeptic]

You're probably right, Ziggurat. Of course, they made the mistake of forgetting they're not being attacked by Jews or Americans, so nobody cares how many civilans were killed on their side.

[Ziggurat]

You're probably right, Ziggurat. Of course, they made the mistake of forgetting they're not being attacked by Jews or Americans, so nobody cares how many civilans were killed on their side.

Oh, some people still care. It just doesn't actually matter that they care. Sri Lanka found a major power patron (China) who is indifferent to such things. Never mind that many of the people who care so fervently also want China to become a serious challenger to American dominance.

[geni]

Getting killed last is not my idea of protection.

It was the best on offer since he didn't seem prepared to leave the country.


Examples?

Try killing a bunch of jews and see how it works out for you.

[Darth Rotor]

It was the best on offer since he didn't seem prepared to leave the country.

Try killing a bunch of jews and see how it works out for you.
How many?

Where?

To what ultimate aim? What's the political objective here?

Geni, why did you toss this Godwin thing in here?

DR

[Ziggurat]

Try killing a bunch of jews and see how it works out for you.

Uh, no. Nazi Germany got crushed because it went to war directly against both the US and the USSR, not because Hitler killed lots of Jews. His ethnic cleansing campaign was incidental to the decision of both of those powers to go to war against Germany. So no, the history of killing Jews suggests nothing of the sort (sadly).

[geni]

How many?

Where?

Ethiopia?


To what ultimate aim? What's the political objective here?

Geni, why did you toss this Godwin thing in here?

DR

Who did I compare to the nazis? Sri lankan government? No. They've not gone in for genocide.

[geni]

Uh, no. Nazi Germany got crushed because it went to war directly against both the US and the USSR, not because Hitler killed lots of Jews. His ethnic cleansing campaign was incidental to the decision of both of those powers to go to war against Germany. So no, the history of killing Jews suggests nothing of the sort (sadly).

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=gulag&word2=Auschwitz+

All those statements about never again etc etc. Doesn't happen of course but the impact of the genocide against jews was very different from say what Japan did to Chinese around the same time.

[Darth Rotor]

http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=gulag&word2=Auschwitz+

All those statements about never again etc etc. Doesn't happen of course but the impact of the genocide against jews was very different from say what Japan did to Chinese around the same time.

LET'S NOT derail into Jews and Germany, circa WW II, in this Tamil and Sri Lanka thread.

Please.

Geni, IMO, your sally in that regard was ill timed and ill conceived.

This civil war is not the kind of fight you ought to compare to WW II, nor to Hitler's final solution.

I do not note any move to genocide by the Sinhalese versus the Tamil. Arguments to that extente are, to my eye, propaganda.

Tamil are to be part of the nation once the fighting stops.

Or did I miss a memo?

DR

[geni]

LET'S NOT derail into Jews and Germany, circa WW II, in this Tamil and Sri Lanka thread.

Please.

Geni, IMO, your sally in that regard was ill timed and ill conceived.

This civil war is not the kind of fight you ought to compare to WW II, nor to Hitler's final solution.

Okey then Sierra Leone. the reaction once it was westerners under threat was rather rapaid.

[Tricky]

Split from this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4757944#post4757944)to prevent derail.

[Pardalis]

Has anyone used the "g" word yet?

The Tamil population of Sri Lanka is 3 million (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_population_by_nation). 20 000 casualties is 0,6% of the population, while some people were quick to call the offensive in Gaza "genocide", where roughly 1 000 civilians out of 1.3 million were killed (0,06%).

[Darth Rotor]

Split from this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4757944#post4757944)to prevent derail.
Not the desired outcome, as I was trying to do some self policing and NOT have the teacher put us all out in the hall, but oh well.

I understand you intention. :cool:

DR

[a_unique_person]

That's because you've become accustomed to the way the US fights wars, and so don't realize how remarkable it really is.

It's all about me, is it?

[a_unique_person]

That's because you've become accustomed to the way the US fights wars, and so don't realize how remarkable it really is.

Have you heard of Vietnam?

[Pardalis]

Have you heard of Vietnam?

If it's not always about you it's about the US?

[a_unique_person]

If it's not always about you it's about the US?

Ziggurat raised the topic about US actions in war producing low civilian casualties, not me. I was happy to stick to the topic.

[Ziggurat]

It's all about me, is it?

Of course not. But your beliefs are certainly about you (and a statement of your beliefs is what I responded to).

Have you heard of Vietnam?

Indeed I have. I don't know why you think it proves I'm wrong, though. Are you claiming that the US caused as many civilian casualties as the North Vietnamese army? Because I don't think that's the case, even remotely. Not to mention we've changed our fighting methods considerably since then. Perhaps you'd like to actually make an argument, rather than just a reference.

[a_unique_person]

Of course not. But your beliefs are certainly about you (and a statement of your beliefs is what I responded to).



Maybe you should read the membership agreement, because one thing you constantly do is push the limits of violating it.





Indeed I have. I don't know why you think it proves I'm wrong, though. Are you claiming that the US caused as many civilian casualties as the North Vietnamese army? Because I don't think that's the case, even remotely. Not to mention we've changed our fighting methods considerably since then. Perhaps you'd like to actually make an argument, rather than just a reference.

Moving the goal posts again. You raised the question of the USA, now you want to talk about the North Vietnamese? Millions died in that war, and that war was a direct result of US foreign policy and it involved the use of heavy weapons on civilian populations by the US. Read 'A Bright Shining Lie".

[corplinx]

Have you heard of Vietnam?

Vaguely. It was a war that was over before I was born.

[a_unique_person]

Vaguely. It was a war that was over before I was born.

I was nearly at the age I could have been drafted for it. I can still remember the Mai Lai photographs in the newspaper.

[a_unique_person]

Not to mention we've changed our fighting methods considerably since then. Perhaps you'd like to actually make an argument, rather than just a reference.

The argument is obvious, in context.


That's because you've become accustomed to the way the US fights wars, and so don't realize how remarkable it really is.


I pointed out a war in which millions died, including about a million civilians. You then point out that "Not to mention we've changed our fighting methods considerably since then."

Which seems to be a case of contradicting yourself.

[tyr_13]

The argument is obvious, in context.



I pointed out a war in which millions died, including about a million civilians. You then point out that "Not to mention we've changed our fighting methods considerably since then."

Which seems to be a case of contradicting yourself.

"The way the US fights wars," is present tense. No contradiction at all.

[Ziggurat]

I pointed out a war in which millions died

But forgot to mention who actually killed them, or even when they died. So even after being challenged on the topic, you continue to ignore these rather critical aspects. Thanks for playing, try again.

[a_unique_person]

"The way the US fights wars," is present tense. No contradiction at all.

?? He is claiming at least that the US fights wars now differently to who it fought wars then. So it is possible to fight a war and minimize civilian casualties. I'm just going by his logic.

[Pardalis]

So far there hasn't been much media coverage on this massacre.

No international outrage and condemnation, no rallies, no videos of injured children being carried to hospitals... not a peep from the usual self-described peace activists.

Threads about Sri Lanka can't get passed two pages of discussion.

[Ziggurat]

Threads about Sri Lanka can't get passed two pages of discussion.

Then let's start nitpicking other's spelling and grammar: "past two pages", not "passed two pages".

PS: I left you a mistake in this post which you can respond to in kind.

[geni]

So far there hasn't been much media coverage on this massacre.

Media haven't been allowed in so not much to report.


No international outrage and condemnation, no rallies, no videos of injured children being carried to hospitals... not a peep from the usual self-described peace activists.

A little late for peace activists. It's human rights activists turf now and they are makeing something of a fuss.

[Pardalis]

Media haven't been allowed in so not much to report.

They hadn't been allowed much in Gaza either. Tamils don't have the same PR people than Palestinians I guess.

A little late for peace activists. It's human rights activists turf now and they are makeing something of a fuss.Not here they don't.

[geni]

They hadn't been allowed much in Gaza either. Tamils don't have the same PR people than Palestinians I guess.


Rather a lot of Gaza can be seen from sourounding areas and the locals have got fairly good at keeping up a supply of stock images.


Not here they don't.

Well they are not your former imperial proxies.

Things like the Huffington Post are raiseing the issue mind.