War and Peace

[baxter]

First World War (1914-18): 15 000 000
Russian Civil War (1917-22): 9 000 000
Soviet Union, Stalin's regime (1924-53): 20 000 000
Second world war (1937-45): 55 000 000
Afghanistan (1979-2001): 1 800 000
Mozambique (1975-1993): 1 000 000
Cambodia, Khmer Rouge (1975-1978): 1 650 000
Iran-Iraq War (1980-88): 1 000 000
Sudan (1983 et seq.): 1 900 000
Kinshasa Congo (1998 et seq.): 3 300 000
Bangladesh (1971): 1 250 000
Ethiopia (1962-92): 1 400 000
First Indochina War (1945-54): 400 000
Second Indochina War (1960-75): 3 500 000
Rwanda and Burundi (1959-95): 1 350 000
Algeria (1954-62): 675 000
Korean War (1950-53): 2 800 000
Mexican Revolution (1910-20): 1 000 000
Armenian Massacres (1915-23): 1 500 000
China, Warlord Era (1917-28): 800 000
China, Nationalist Era (1928-37): 3 100 000
Amazonia (1900-12): 250 000
Russo-Japanese War (1904-05): 130 000
Maji-Maji Revolt, German East Africa (1905-07): 175 000
Libya (1911-31): 125 000
Balkan Wars (1912-13): 140 000
Greco-Turkish War (1919-1922): 250 000
Spanish Civil War (1936-39) and Franco Regime (1939-75): 365 000
Russo-Finnish War (1939-1940): 150 000
Yugoslavia, Tito's Regime (1944-80): 200 000
Colombia (1946-58): 200 000
India (1947): 500 000
Romania (1948-89): 150 000
Sudan (1955-72): 500 000
Guatemala (1960-1996): 200 000
Indonesia (1965-66): 450 000
Uganda, Idi Amin's regime (1972-79): 300 000
Vietnam, post-war Communist regime (1975 et seq.): 430 000
Angola (1975 et seq.): 550 000
East Timor, Conquest by Indonesia (1975-99): 200 000
Lebanon (1975-90): 150 000
Cambodian Civil War (1978-91): 225 000
Iraq, Saddam Hussein (1979-2003): 300 000
Uganda (1979-86): 300 000
Kurdistan (1980s, 1990s): 300 000
Liberia (1989-97): 150 000
Iraq (1990-): 350 000
Bosnia and Herzegovina (1992-95): 175 000
Somalia (1991 et seq.): 400 000
Herero War, German Southwest Africa (1904-07): 75 000
Russo-Polish War (1918-1920): 100 000
Morocco (1921-26) 68 000
Chaco War (1932-35): 100 000
North Yemen (1962-70): 100 000
Nicaragua (1972-91): 60 000
El Salvador (1979-92): 75 000
Sierra Leone (1991-2002): 75 000
Algeria (1992-2002): 100 000
Finnish Civil War (1918): 30 000
Mongolia (1926-1991): 35 000
El Salvador (1931-32): 30 000
South Korea (1948-49) 40 000
Bulgaria (1948-89): 30 000
North Vietnam (1954-75): 50 000

The list is endless.

here is the link

http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/warstatx.htm

The figures are estimated deaths in the 20th century.

I have always studied wars, whether it be civil, or world wide and have tried to compile a list of mans intolerance to each other.

I hope at the end of this century lists like this will be consigned to the history books but I fear they won’t.

I have put forward the above list to ask one simple question. Whether you be left or right. My question is this:

As the most intelligent creature on this planet will we ever reach a point where we say enough is enough or are we really destined to destroy ourselves?

[Sprafa]

we also had a demographical explosion. These wars were nothing, drops in the Ocean.

With the exception of possibly WWII none of these truly affected the Human race. We have learned the cost of Total War (or I hope) and it won't happen again. Nuclear weapons have insured peace thru far more incertain times.

We do not have the capability to anihilate ourselves. Nuclear war would not terminate the Human Race. It would slow us down for hundreds of years, but we'd catch up.

Yes, war is a tragedy. But people live & die everyday.

war is good for business, and business owns politics in the developed world, therefore, to support business there must be war.

[RakuraiTenjin]

Originally Posted by kmack

war is good for business, and business owns politics in the developed world, therefore, to support business there must be war.

War puts the economy/wall street on edge and really puts a lot of businesses in the crapper. The arms companies make just as much during peace time winning contracts to develope new technology.

[theotherguy]

Originally Posted by Sprafa

We do not have the capability to anihilate ourselves. .

If we somehow developed a weapon capable of destroying the planet and had no other ways of getting off of it, yes we would annhilate ourselves. The world exists on a carefully balanced cycle, if you mess it up, it ends. Species go extinct all the time, and we will be killed off eventually by something, and most likely ourselves. If, for instance, a rate of pollution continues, there may come a time when the ozone cannot replenish itself, or there may come a time when plants are incapable of sustaining their ecosystems due to lack of biodeversity. In either case, yes, we could survive with technology for a time...but ultimatley, all of our energy and technology comes from the world around us...without any resources there is no possibility for technical advance.

I am not saying that we WILL annihilate ourselves, but that it is certainly possible....and our annhiliation probably wouldnt come from war but from peace. Those demographic explosions you speak of really have the ultimate capactiy to kill us. If the rate of population and energy consumption increases at the same rate as it is now...in 2600, people would literally be standing shoulder to shoulder, and energy consumption would be enough to raise the air temperature enough to melt the crust of the earth. Of course, this is a purely mathematical extrapolation, but it still is kind of scary to think about.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by theotherguy

If we somehow developed a weapon capable of destroying the planet and had no other ways of getting off of it, yes we would annhilate ourselves. The world exists on a carefully balanced cycle, if you mess it up, it ends. Species go extinct all the time, and we will be killed off eventually by something, and most likely ourselves. If, for instance, a rate of pollution continues, there may come a time when the ozone cannot replenish itself, or there may come a time when plants are incapable of sustaining their ecosystems due to lack of biodeversity. In either case, yes, we could survive with technology for a time...but ultimatley, all of our energy and technology comes from the world around us...without any resources there is no possibility for technical advance.

I am not saying that we WILL annihilate ourselves, but that it is certainly possible....and our annhiliation probably wouldnt come from war but from peace. Those demographic explosions you speak of really have the ultimate capactiy to kill us. If the rate of population and energy consumption increases at the same rate as it is now...in 2600, people would literally be standing shoulder to shoulder, and energy consumption would be enough to raise the air temperature enough to melt the crust of the earth. Of course, this is a purely mathematical extrapolation, but it still is kind of scary to think about.

But in 2600, how can you prove that the rate of population growth will be the same as it is now and how do you know that there won't be technology to colonise Mars, the Moon and Space and also be using something like Zero Point Vacuum energy to forfil our needs? The fact of the matter is, the population in the 1st World Countries would be falling if it wasn't for immigration, the population of Japan is already leveling out. The only reason the population is rising is due to the fact that a lot of 3rd world people can't use contraception due to religious morals or can't use it as they can't get hold of it, also due to the fact that their children might die of some terrible disease so they need to have lots of them. If we sort out the 3rd world countries so they become 1st world countries, the human population might start falling.

[Sprafa]

The demographic explosion is near the end, it's predicted that if it keeps going like it is now, we'll soon have a negative global population growth by 2100.


btw, does any of you guys know what was the longest period of time the USA was in peace ?

[baxter]

I don't know about the US but I did read somewhere, sorry I really can't remember where, that since WW2 there had been a total of 2 days of total world peace.It's probably total bs but I'm sure I read it somewhere.

[Razor]

Originally Posted by baxter

I don't know about the US but I did read somewhere, sorry I really can't remember where, that since WW2 there had been a total of 2 days of total world peace.It's probably total bs but I'm sure I read it somewhere.

I also read something similar, that from 1900 to 2000, there had been a total of 7 days of world peace.

[CptStern]

I believe it


there was one event that didnt make the list ..the genocide of 1.2 million Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman empire (Turkey) in 1915


the 90th anniversary of the start of the genocide is coming up on the 24th of this month

[mortiz]

Originally Posted by CptStern

I believe it


there was one event that didnt make the list ..the genocide of 1.2 million Armenians at the hands of the Ottoman empire (Turkey) in 1915


the 90th anniversary of the start of the genocide is coming up on the 24th of this month

It did

Armenian Massacres (1915-23): 1 500 000

[CptStern]

heh, I had to look twice more to find it

Originally Posted by RakuraiTenjin

War puts the economy/wall street on edge and really puts a lot of businesses in the crapper. The arms companies make just as much during peace time winning contracts to develope new technology.

ok, not to call you a moron, but what happened before WWII (ill give you a hint, it begins with G and rhymes with Rate Freesession) and what happened once WWII was on and after it?

[Sprafa]

Originally Posted by kmack

ok, not to call you a moron, but what happened before WWII (ill give you a hint, it begins with G and rhymes with Rate Freesession) and what happened once WWII was on and after it?

War does encourages the economy if it is well ran.

The WWII for the US is a perfect example. Because the US had the help of USSR and the Britons and it never really entered into Total War.

But for the USSR for instance, the War was disastrous economically, because they had to devote themselves to Total War agaisnt the Germans, meaning everything that came from the USSR had to be for the War. Same thing for the Britons. The US did it to a point with rationings, etc, but they were never "totally" comitted to it, especially after 1942/3.

And the US already had a pretty good economy thanks to the New Deal

[The Monkey]

15 million didn't die in WWI. 8.6 million is the number I've learned...