3 ms·

I have a hard time believing anyone could think that killing off half a billion people would be the way to go ... It just sounds too James Bond villanesque. ht

by jamieb 15y ago

I have a hard time believing anyone could think that killing off half a billion people would be the way to go ... It just sounds too James Bond villanesque. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Solution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Final_Solution http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge#Number_of_deaths http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khmer_Rouge#Number_of_deaths http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rwandan_genocide http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War_II http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bombing_of_Dresden_in_World_War... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_and_Nagasaki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_bombings_of_Hiroshima_an... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history

forensic 15y ago
And those are just the groups who actually achieved it. Many more thought about it or tried it. The OP said he "can't even believe that anyone could think of [mass murder]." Think! Lack of imagination, lack of historical awareness, or just plain willful ignorance?
- zizee 15y ago
  Lack of imagination, lack of historical awareness, or just plain willful ignorance? Or perhaps I was just chose the wrong turn of phrase? No need to go on a pedantic nerd rage. Of course people could think about it. Of course people have killed millions of people in the past. What I was trying to say is that any sensible leader in a industrialised nation would not choose exterminating 50% of their population instead of than trying to affect social change. Of course we could have another Stalin or Hitler or Pol Pot who tries for genocide again. But killing 50% of your population is much different to killing 5%. Those 50% are going to have friends so you'd be up against 80-90% of the population. It would just be more sensible to try to redistribute wealth at that stage. But yes, I'm sure whack jobs can think about these things and with modern weapons you could probably do it etc.

by jamieb 15y ago

forensic 15y ago

And those are just the groups who actually achieved it. Many more thought about it or tried it. The OP said he "can't even believe that anyone could think of [mass murder]." Think! Lack of imagination, lack of historical awareness, or just plain willful ignorance?

zizee 15y ago
Lack of imagination, lack of historical awareness, or just plain willful ignorance? Or perhaps I was just chose the wrong turn of phrase? No need to go on a pedantic nerd rage. Of course people could think about it. Of course people have killed millions of people in the past. What I was trying to say is that any sensible leader in a industrialised nation would not choose exterminating 50% of their population instead of than trying to affect social change. Of course we could have another Stalin or Hitler or Pol Pot who tries for genocide again. But killing 50% of your population is much different to killing 5%. Those 50% are going to have friends so you'd be up against 80-90% of the population. It would just be more sensible to try to redistribute wealth at that stage. But yes, I'm sure whack jobs can think about these things and with modern weapons you could probably do it etc.