this post was submitted on 14 Nov 2023
263 points (97.5% liked)
World News
32328 readers
984 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yum, yes duh. A higher rate of death over 20 years is much different then a single month.
So you say 200,000-300,000 deaths in 20 years is better that 11,000 in one month?
Wtf?
I really dont fucking know how americans can justify bullshit like this.
Its 20,000-30,000 dead people a year, I know its not like 11,000 in a month, but I really hope that israel is going to stop soon.
Do math. 200000÷20=10000 a year 833.3 repeating.
300000÷30= 15000 a year or 1250 a month
It is objective better.
Your high of you think 10000 a month is better than 10000 a year.
I never said better. Its fucked up compared to really fucked up.
You keep justifying the USs shit to feel better? The same thing are the Israelis doing probably.
Nobody wants to be the Genocide maker.
Keep on living your life, thinking that the US killing civillians is somehow better than Israel killing civillians.
I did the math, few comments above.
When Israel goes on like this they will have 130,000 deaths per year, so they could go on for 3 years and be up with the same numbers as the US after 9/11.
Its just faster, and would be horrible. So I just hope the killing will end soon, and that you see then how fucked up the US strategy after 9/11 was. Israel uses the same argument as the US.
Survey says:?
I didn't say either was morally correct but one is clearly statistically worse as a matter of casualties. Why you think that's attempting justifying either is beyond me and perhaps something you aught to reflect on personally.
Correct.
I never said anything about it's morality but causing a years worth of deaths in Afghanistan/Iraq in a single month with the vast majority being non combatants and over a third being non military aged children.
Perhaps you did, I didn't see it but you certainly haven't reflected on it if you think your argument is sound.
That would be more deaths bud.
Oh "it's just faster" gotcha. Industrialized murder is somehow more ethically sound to you, gotcha.
Its faster, the (still, and hopefully fictional) scenario where Israel continues at tbe same killrate.
Wikipedia says 180,000 in afgahnistan and around 150,000-200,000 in Irak
I dont know why we have this discussion, but both is horrible and there is no justification of killing civillians at any rate.
I used the numbers you provided, if they're wrong it's because you were wrong and similarly a shaker number over a longer period provides more support for my argument not less as you imply.
No one is denying both are horrible. You're the only one who's claimed I've taken a stance on it at all.