Which do you think was worst?

[Spec]

I just had this discussion with a friend yesterday. We were talkin about the holocaust and such and he was telling me why he thought it the worst mass killing of all time.



I may be wrong, but I disagree. I consider the conquest of america the worst mass killing of all time. IIRC, 100 million or so american indians were killed...Is that figure right? I think so...But over what period of time though. Also, american indians were not in concentration camps, but overkilled anyway.

So what do you think? Which is worst iyo?

[SlowwHand]

Why America?

[EyesOfNight]

Most of native deaths were not at the hands of the Spanish, but at the hands of the disease they brought.

[Jon Miller]

The killings of Indians was by disease/etc, not generally a purposeful killing as in the Holocaust. And yes, I know about blankets.

Jon Miller

[Spec]

Well, most of 100 million means what? 80 million?

So 20 million indians were massacred. Thats still 13 million more than the jews. no?

Spec.

[EyesOfNight]

Here's an idea, why don't you do a little research before you decide to start throwing numbers around? It almost sounds like you WANT it to be worse than the holocaust.

[Pekka]

I don't think numbers matter so much, though of course they matter.

I'd say a killing of a people is worst, when it has been succesful or very close. Do you see many Indians these days?

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Pekka
Do you see many Indians these days?

[Pekka]

If I said what the appropriate reply would be, Drogue would prolly ban me for subhuman talks ..

[LordShiva]

Do it!

Or are you scared?

[Pekka]

No, but I also won't underestimate the capabilities of PC action of our commies in here.

[LordShiva]

You, sir, are the worst.

[Pekka]

The last comment I made with you was deleted by the mods. I take that as a hint, if I didn't, I'd be stupid.

No sir, you are the worst in everything, except in being worst, because in that, you do a damn good job.

[Spec]

Originally posted by Drixnak
Here's an idea, why don't you do a little research before you decide to start throwing numbers around? It almost sounds like you WANT it to be worse than the holocaust.

Here's an Idea, why dont you just kill yourself?

I did the research dimwit, so how about you do the same before talking out of your ass.

Many figures are only estimations, and from the sources that I have read, between 75 and 125 million indians died. And as for the percentage that died of diseases (The most devastating disease was smallpox, but other deadly diseases including typhus, measles, influenza, bubonic plague, mumps, yellow fever, and whooping cough. The Americas also had endemic diseases, perhaps including a type of syphilis, which soon became rampant in the Old World ) it ranges from 70 to 90%, so 80% (as I said) is a good average.

so lets take the smallest amount of people, 75 million, times 90% at the most equals to 7.5 million getting killed by conquistadors. Which is still more than the holocaust IMO.
Spec.

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by Pekka
I'd say a killing of a people is worst, when it has been succesful or very close. Do you see many Indians these days?

It depends also on what you are talking about. There aren't any Romans left anymore either but that doesn't mean they suffered a genocide that cost hundreds of millions of lives.

The natives to the Americas are alive and well in what we call Latinos. The mixed offspring of the natives and Europeans who make up most of the population of the Americas currently.

Not to defend anything, a lot of people died, and cultures were wiped out and all that.