• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged rlopez2's thread to discuss recent history

rlopez2 said:
I find your reactions to my points (and all I say I do in flasifiable ways, which might be what bothers you) so unhinged that at times I wonder if you notice to the extent that you are making fun of yourself.

...
Click to expand...

That's some mighty tasty projection right there.
Yum! [emoji1]
 
rlopez2 said:
I find your reactions to my points (and all I say I do in flasifiable ways, which might be what bothers you) so unhinged that at times I wonder if you notice to the extent that you are making fun of yourself.

In fact, do you remember those two Canadian comedians who pranked, owned Sarah Palin teling her it was Sarközy (the French president) talking to her. It became so weird that at times even the comedians thought they were the ones being somehow pranked by Palin!
Click to expand...

Your failure to make your point and come across as confused and delusional is on you.
 
Your failure to make your point and come across as confused and delusional is on you.
Click to expand...

You are so right! People have called me "delusional" before.

The thing that keeps me going is the hope that I will one day be finally able to kiss the crack of Isinbayeva's ass. But other than Isinbayeva herself losing her sleep over not being able to get a hold of me and me being "delusional", I don't think that anyone on this planet earth we must share is bothered by any of it. Actually, to be honest, her husband was having some issues because he wants his face tattooed on her right buttock (he said it is her strongest). I am squarely fine about her tattooing my flat nose of her left buttock. If she had issues with her private parts, just licking her armpit after not using deodorant for two weeks would do.

Now, when gringos busy their minds with their delusions about being " ... 'the' 'brave' ...", about caring for "democracy", "the rule of law", "justice", ... and all that bs they like to entertain their bored, Hollywoodesque minds with, boys, they are messy!

I keep wondering what those stanzas in Patrick Henry’s mind, voice and times have to do with current day USA, but that seems to be one of the many "I don’t understand", blind spots, cosmic silence issues with gringos. How do they "prove" to themselves, claim Patrick Henry’s stanzas? Well, I remember before the invasion of Afghanistan (1st or 2nd most poor, defenseless country in the world) how the NYTimes (yeah, the same NYTimes who call sovereign nations half around the globe "those regions") had a large U.S. flag on their front page and pictures of patriots wearing uniforms (what those uniforms do to your soul if you had any to begin with!) and showing their badges who sat in a boardroom ... What were they doing? They were watching a few people hiding in mountains who were about to be droned, but when actual forces (Russia and/or China) call their bluff, they always, automatically, schizophrenically indeed!, switch to their other truer, more defining "responsible" selves and something also invariably happens: the dixie chicken farted off key during a concert, Janet’s Jackson showy tits gave people a theme to talk, think about, ...
 
"By popular demand", here is the first part of what was supposed to be your primary school Math homework. The teacher in me tells me I should still leave to you at least the last division (even though I am sure you will start having qualms about that as well):

I go from what I consider to be a true and fair definition of a -genocidal ratio- as the ratio of all people killed in a war by the agressor to the percentage of their own, since a war is a confrontation of people as nations and/or organized groups seeking some sort of general social goal, because you can't compare the abusive bs by "freedom lovers" with Nazism for many technical, historical and consequential reasons, some of which I have made already explicit and, apparently, you "don't 'understand'", have nothing sensical to say about any of them. All you are able to do is twist, bend and downplay my points.

Sources:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/world-war-two-casualties-by-country/World War Two Casualties By Country 2020.html
https://www.nationalww2museum.org/s...arch-starters-worldwide-deaths-world-war.html

How many people were killed by Nazism, that is the European part of WWII:
50,542,100 (using the highest figures)

What percentage of their own (German + Austrian people in general) were killed?
Deaths as % of 1939 population: 8.26 (lowest figure (contirbuting to a higher ratio))

Genocidal ratio by Nazism: (50,542,100 / 8.26) = ( 5054210000 / 826 ) = 6118898.30508475

Notes:
* I included India because in those times the British were still freedom loving them as a colony. As you would expect, those "patriotically" sent in the way of deaths were mostly "selected" based on their cast social system, but, anyway, they died during WWII serving "her majesty".
 
rlopez2 said:
I go from what I consider to be a true and fair definition of a -genocidal ratio- as the ratio of all people killed in a war by the agressor to the percentage of their own,
Click to expand...

You're dividing a number by a percentage. Your actual "genocidal ratio" is therefore the product of the number of people killed by a nation and the population of that nation, divided by the product of 100 and the number of people from that nation that die, in a war. Note, also, that in your figures, the percentage of deaths in Germany and Austria killed in WW2 includes those killed by the Nazis in their deliberate acts of genocide; these appear in the expression used for the denominator - as I pointed out earlier and you tried to obscure with mathematical nonsense - thereby leading to the conclusion that, had the Nazis killed more of their own population, the value you calculate for their "genocidal ratio" would have been lower rather than higher.

Bottom line: your "genocidal ratio" is an ill-considered and largely arbitrary quantity that bears no relation to the actual level of genocide carried out by a nation.

Dave
 
You're dividing a number by a percentage.
Click to expand...
as a measure of the share of their own killed

Your actual "genocidal ratio" is therefore the product of the number of people killed by a nation and the population of that nation, divided by the product of 100 and the number of people from that nation that die, in a war.
Click to expand...
the product of the number of people killed by a nation times 100 divided by the number of people from that nation that died in the war the aggresors started

Note, also, that in your figures, the percentage of deaths in Germany and Austria killed in WW2 includes those killed by the Nazis in their deliberate acts of genocide; these appear in the expression used for the denominator - as I pointed out earlier and you tried to obscure with mathematical nonsense - thereby leading to the conclusion that, had the Nazis killed more of their own population, the value you calculate for their "genocidal ratio" would have been lower rather than higher.
Click to expand...
OK, Einstein! I am not sure if I get your point, but, yes, Nazis also killed whomever didn't align with "the party line" their "higher goals", but I don't think that they were actually in the business of killing their own. They needed them for the war, don't you think? Also, since you are accusing me of obfuscating this matter with "mathematical nonsense" when all I am doing is prorating the killing by both Nazism and "freedom lovers" to establish a comparative basis, I wonder if you notice that there are very "questionable" implicit ideas in your interpretation: Are you implying that, as USG does, messing around with everybody else and genocidally invading countries based on lies it is OK as long as you keep you own "happy" watching TV?
 
rlopez2 said:
the product of the number of people killed by a nation times 100 divided by the number of people from that nation that died in the war the aggresors started
Click to expand...

In the case of Nazi Germany, don't forget that they were the aggressors who started the war.


rlopez2 said:
OK, Einstein! I am not sure if I get your point, but, yes, Nazis also killed whomever didn't align with "the party line" their "higher goals", but I don't think that they were actually in the business of killing their own. They needed them for the war, don't you think?
Click to expand...

The Nazis killed Jews, Romani, the mentally ill, homosexuals and their political opponents. They were very much in the business of killing their own, even if they did need them for the war. Don't underestimate the blind stupidity that underpinned Nazism.

rlopez2 said:
Also, since you are accusing me of obfuscating this matter with "mathematical nonsense" when all I am doing is prorating the killing by both Nazism and "freedom lovers" to establish a comparative basis,
Click to expand...

No. You're trying to do that, and failing, because (a) you have established no rational basis for equating ratios of deaths on the two sides in a war to the morality of the two sides, and (b) you're incompetent when it comes to understanding the meanings of the numbers you're using.

rlopez2 said:
I wonder if you notice that there are very "questionable" implicit ideas in your interpretation: Are you implying that, as USG does, messing around with everybody else and genocidally invading countries based on lies it is OK as long as you keep you own "happy" watching TV?
Click to expand...

Please feel free to link to where I've said any such thing. I'd prefer it if you discussed what I actually posted rather than making up things you wish I'd posted and pretending I posted them, though I realise that may be a bit much to hope for here.

Dave
 
In the recent border dispute between China and India a couple of Indian soldiers were killed.

Let's see what China's "genocide ratio" is:

That's 2 x the population of China divided by zero. Times 100. Gosh. Beat that.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
In the recent border dispute between China and India a couple of Indian soldiers were killed.

Let's see what China's "genocide ratio" is:

That's 2 x the population of China divided by zero. Times 100. Gosh. Beat that.
Click to expand...

Seems like there is some border indicent between China and India every week. Don't see that changing much.
 
rlopez2 said:
... Nazis also killed whomever didn't align with "the party line" their "higher goals", but I don't think that they were actually in the business of killing their own. ...
Click to expand...
yes, they killed their own - did you try to get this right? No

NAZIs killed over 400,000 Germans for no reason, except hate from the idiot Hitler
 
In the case of Nazi Germany, don't forget that they were the aggressors who started the war.
Click to expand...

Were they? What do you even mean? I have never claimed that they weren't. All I doing is a comparative Anthropology of sorts (to call it something) to prove that freedom lovers can't even claim a higher moral ground while comparien them to Nazis.

... Nazis also killed whomever didn't align with "the party line" their "higher goals", but I don't think that they were actually in the business of killing their own. ...
Click to expand...
yes, they killed their own - did you try to get this right? No
NAZIs killed over 400,000 Germans for no reason, except hate from the idiot Hitler
Click to expand...

Hans's lines always go like this. He constantly repeat to that Nazis invaded the Dutch, Belgien and Luxemburg. Does he mean that freedom lovers are "better", "morally grounded" because they invade Afghanistan, Nicaragua, Haiti, Cuba, Yemen, ... ?

What do you mean? that is it good for freedom lovers to keep their people happy watching TV while they go about their bloody freedom loving genocidal business around the world?
 
I thought any of you could finish the Math after the explanation of the terms involved. How could you attempt to articulate such higher concepts as morality which neurobiologically speaking are more metabolically demanding, when you can't even do primary school Math?

The same steps I followed with the freedom loving by Nazis, you should follow with the 48 countries of the "coalition of the willing":

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_willing

you could just use the countries that provided the "patriots" for the invasion: U.S., Britain, Australia and Poland and an "as-good-as-it-gets" approximation of the people killed so far in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Iran, "Nextistan", ...

Here some of the is the publicly available data you will find handy:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_the_United_Kingdom
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Australia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demography_of_Poland

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_War_on_Terror
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraqi_conflict_(2003–present))

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_invasion_of_Iraq
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Iraq_War
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan_(2001–present))
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_drone_strikes_in_Pakistan
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_drone_strikes_in_Yemen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_from_U.S._drone_strikes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_...attributed_to_United_States_government_forces

As you would expect it would be harder to get a number because "those people being 'greater gooded' by freedom lovers don't really count". There is after all a difference between terrorism and "errorism", no?

After you get that number all you need to do is divide both figures. You will enjoy proving me to be idiotically wrong again. My numbers are not quite right!
 
Last edited:
In the recent border dispute between China and India a couple of Indian soldiers were killed.
Let's see what China's "genocide ratio" is:
That's 2 x the population of China divided by zero. Times 100. Gosh. Beat that.
Click to expand...

There they go ...
 
rlopez2 said:
I thought any of you could finish the Math after the explanation of the terms involved. How could you attempt to articulate such higher concepts as morality which neurobiologically speaking are more metabolically demanding, when you can't even do primary school Math?
Click to expand...

When you start from an absurd axiom, no amount of correct mathematics can transform your position into a reasonable one.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom