now can someone tell me how many the u.s killed?

[new democracy]

after my thread "how many castro killed", it is time to criticize the other side. now all of you cappis can't deny that america is responsible to allot of deaths after so many wars that america started. denying that is like denying the holocaust. it is time that you hard core cappis will admit that your government does make mistakes. i don't want to piss anyone of, i just want a sincere answer. how many america killed?

[Nateddi]

http://members.aol.com/bblum6/intronew.htm

[Anonymous]

http://www.che-lives.com/cgi/community/upload/Bush_-_Terrorist.gif here´s a small list

[Reuben]

great post anarchist

[Marxman]

America. Made by the burgeois revolution, now has no limits to its expansion and murders. Step by step, USA gets a new king to issue new orders for mass slaughter. Unfortunately, now it has a Hitler on its throne, which started to make fictitious about other countries being terrorist after the 11th directed September. And where did he find the nerves to blame the East for his own crimes. Like Lenin said "fascism is capitalism in crisis" and oh boy, was he right. The approximate number of the casaulties caused by the American government can be counted from 11th September backwards. You'll find a number of about billion or even more that have died under the grasp of capitalism/imperialism. Too bad we have idiots that murder people for lunch on thrones but that's just life. We communists have to change that routine.

[Pinko]

As I posted else where, the US has kiiled as many Afghan civilians in the bombing campaign against the Taliban and Al-Qaida as died in the WTC attacks. This is not justice, this is blind revenge.

Proof:
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mwherold/AfghanDailyCount.xls
http://www.cursor.org/stories/archivistan.htm

Who are the terrorists now?

[Tkinter1]

Its not in the U.S.'s interest to kill civilians. But in war there aren't really any rules and anyone can die. The geneva convention and others like it are worthless.

The U.S. tries to attack areas that are least densly populated with civilians and attacks them. Its not strategicaly wise to bomb civilians no.1 becuase it makes you look like savage terrorists, and 2 you get an increased social unrest. And in that ridiculous picture the total number of killed does not equal half of what Stalins terror reign left, and his actions weren't accidental.

Gulag attrocities and such:

http://www.dickinson.edu/~history/dictator...E%20COLD%20DAMP (http://www.dickinson.edu/~history/dictators/stalin_terror.html#THE%20COLD%20DAMP)

"total (est.) amount of internment's during the years 1934-52 was between 18.25 and 24 million.

Of these interments 7 million were estimated executed.

The Soviet Union suffered 25 million estimated deaths between 1941-1945.

Internment peaks at Stalin's death in 1953 at 1.7 million."

put that in your pipe and smoke it.

(Edited by Tkinter1 at 6:09 am on Aug. 31, 2002)

[Pinko]

[Tkinter1]
"The U.S. tries to attack areas that are least densly populated with civilians and attacks them. Its not strategicaly wise to bomb civilians no.1 becuase it makes you look like savage terrorists, and 2 you get an increased social unrest. And in that ridiculous picture the total number of killed does not equal half of what Stalins terror reign left, and his actions weren't accidental.

1) I am not defending Stalin.
2) The USA deliberately bombed densely populated (with civilians) areas with so-called precision weaponary that has been proved unreliable over and over again. Read some of the articles in the second URL I posted. This shows a total lack of interest in the lives of the civilian population. They could have achieved the same goals by different methods, but this would increase the risk to the US armed forces. Thousands of Afghani lives are worth less than a few US citizens that are supposedly willing to give up their lives for the US.
Hypocracy. Total fucking hypocracy.

[deadpool 52]

But in war there aren't really any rules and anyone can die.

Funny, I never remember hearing about a war with Guatemala.

(Edited by deadpool 52 at 11:21 am on Aug. 31, 2002)

[Tkinter1]

But in war there aren't really any rules and anyone can die.

Funny, I never remember hearing about a war with Guatemala.

I dont see how my quote pertains to what you're talking about.


(Edited by Tkinter1 at 6:26 am on Aug. 31, 2002)

[Tkinter1]

The U.S. does not deliberately attack civilians. They may in some cases, have to regard a mission as "yea some civilians may perish, but they won't die in vain."

No war comes without civilian casualties

[deadpool 52]

That sounds more like a personal problem.

[Tkinter1]

They have to (or should) put there personal feelings aside and look at the greater good, which was what I was trying to get at

[deadpool 52]

So securing the oil companies interests is for the greater good?

[Tkinter1]

Again you have to be more specific as to what you are talking about...what incident

[deadpool 52]

Here is a question that you could understand:

Why kill thousands of people in Guatemala?

[Tkinter1]

Im sory i stil don undrstan that ther question, you're gona haf to continu to dum it down fo me.

I can't justify every action our government makes(happy?), but there must be a more plausible explaination then, it was for the oil companys.

[deadpool 52]

My job here is done.

[Tkinter1]

LOL.

You could of just asked from the start. Im not afraid to admit that i can't justify everything our governement does. That doesn't mean that it is unjustifiable. Just that i can't

[mujer revolucionaria]

thanks for the link nate.....I emailed that guy about his book.

[Tkinter1]

Pinko if you had to choose between shooting someone you loved or someone you didn't know which one would you shoot?