# Out of 100 million war deaths in 20th century, only 2% attributed to muslims



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

*Is Islam as violent as some people claim?*

*Not according to historical data!*



> _...looking over the last century, the bloodiest in human history... *out of the more than 100 million war deaths in the 20th century, something less than 2 percent came at the hands of Muslim-majority nations. *Most of those dead came in wars where non-Muslim nations played a significant rolesuch as the Iran/Iraq War, where the United States aided the aggressor Iraq, and the Afghan Civil War, where the Soviet Union was a major military force._


In addition to that, murder rates in muslim country's, are less than in western nations.


> _
> *murder rates in most of the Muslim world are very low compared to the United States*, which is especially violent for a wealthy nation._


But what is most surprising of all, is that muslims have the highest disapproval rate of any of the 6 major religions, when it comes to the killing of innocent civilians.


> _Muslim Americans disapprove of violence against civilians at an exceptionally high rate.* When asked if it is justified for an individual or a small group of people to target and kill civilians, 89 percent of Muslims said that it is never justified, which was the highest disapproval rate of the six religious and nonreligious groups polled. *Muslim Americans also rejected military killing of civilians by a wide margin, while a majority of Protestants, Catholics, Jews and Mormons approved of such killings._


With that being said, when someone starts talking about the threat from Islam, I suggest you take that shit with a grain of salt.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

F.A.I.R. is a radical left wing propaganda organization and should not be taken seriously.  But nice try anyway.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> F.A.I.R. is a radical left wing propaganda organization and should not be taken seriously.  But nice try anyway.


Ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.  

Your personal feelings towards a particular website, don't mean jack shit in regards to the truth or falsehood of a claim.

And it can't possibly be propaganda, if you can't provide any evidence the report is false.

So go fuck yourself!


----------



## Politico (Dec 7, 2013)

You should have seen the numbers from the 17th-19th.


----------



## Geaux4it (Dec 7, 2013)

That's still a good percentage that could prove useful bullet fodder

-Geaux


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Politico said:


> You should have seen the numbers from the 17th-19th.


What about the 15th and 16th?

Isn't that when they had the Inquisitions?

When were the Crusades?


----------



## Politico (Dec 7, 2013)

The Inquisition was in the 12th century. Jeez pick up a book,


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > F.A.I.R. is a radical left wing propaganda organization and should not be taken seriously.  But nice try anyway.
> ...


Post something from a legitimate source, asshole.  If it's true, you shouldn't have any trouble finding plenty of them.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> Post something from a legitimate source, asshole.  If it's true, you shouldn't have any trouble finding plenty of them.


You don't decide what's legitimate or not.

At least I posted a source.

All you do, is shoot your big fucking mouth off!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Politico said:


> The Inquisition was in the 12th century. Jeez pick up a book,


Hey, I read two Shakespeare's! I'm tired.


----------



## Mojo2 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> *Is Islam as violent as some people claim?*
> 
> *Not according to historical data!*
> 
> ...



Here's your salt.

By your reckoning, the spread of Islam isn't to be feared by non-Muslims.

That's like saying smallpox isn't a disease to be worried about because it's ONLY the #10 killer epidemic.



> *Epidemic 10: Smallpox*
> 
> Before European explorers, conquerors and colonists began to flood into the New World in the early 1500s, the Americas were home to an estimated 100 million native people. During the centuries that followed, epidemic diseases decreased that number to somewhere between 5 and 10 million [source:Yount]. While these people, such as the Incas and the Aztecs, had built cities, they hadn't resided in them long enough to breed the kind of diseases Europeans had, nor had they domesticated as many animals. When the Europeans arrived to the Americas, they brought with them a host of diseases for which the native peoples had no defense or immunity.
> 
> ...



10 Worst Epidemics : Discovery Channel

Respected writer Lee Harris cited the lesson of the way the Conquistadors decimated the Aztec Empire as the way we should regard Islam.



> There is one decisive advantage to the evildoer metaphor, and it is this: Combat with evildoers is not Clausewitzian war. *You do not make treaties with evildoers or try to adjust your conduct to make them like you. You do not try to see the world from the evildoers point of view. You do not try to appease them, or persuade them, or reason with them. You try, on the contrary, to outwit them, to vanquish them, to kill them. You behave with them in the same manner that you would deal with a fatal epidemic  you try to wipe it out.*
> 
> So perhaps it is time to retire the war metaphor and to deploy one that is more fitting: the struggle to eradicate disease. The fantasy ideologies of the twentieth century, after all, spread like a virus in susceptible populations: Their propagation was not that suggested by John Stuart Mills marketplace of ideas  fantasy ideologies were not debated and examined, weighed and measured, evaluated and compared. They grew and spread like a cancer in the body politic. For the people who accepted them did not accept them as tentative or provisional. They were unalterable and absolute. And finally, after driving out all other competing ideas and ideologies, they literally turned their host organism into the instrument of their own poisonous and deadly will.
> 
> ...



Al Qaeda's Fantasy Ideology | Hoover Institution


----------



## IlarMeilyr (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > F.A.I.R. is a radical left wing propaganda organization and should not be taken seriously.  But nice try anyway.
> ...



Citing propaganda isn't valid argument, either.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Post something from a legitimate source, asshole.  If it's true, you shouldn't have any trouble finding plenty of them.
> ...


So, if somebody posted a link from a Nazi site stating that the holocaust never happened, everyone should believe it because "at least it's a source"?  You're a joke, dude.


----------



## Alfalfa (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Post something from a legitimate source, asshole.  If it's true, you shouldn't have any trouble finding plenty of them.
> ...



They're butthurt that I have been unmasking their zionist hasbara propaganda news sites they keep quoting as legit.  Now they will challenge ANY source that doesn't have "jewish" or "israel" in the title.


----------



## HenryBHough (Dec 7, 2013)

Interesting that somebody _*approves*_ that 2% of all war deaths are caused by a "religion".  And here we thought we were talking about a "religion of peace".

SILLY us!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



If the site's facts are reliable and context, the problem is with you.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 7, 2013)

By the reasoning of "That's like saying smallpox isn't a disease to be worried about because it's ONLY the #10 killer epidemic" then Christianity is far worse to be feared than Islam.


----------



## daveman (Dec 7, 2013)

What?s FAIR? ? FAIR: Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
*As a progressive group*, FAIR believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.​They TELL you they're biased.


----------



## daveman (Dec 7, 2013)

According to historical data, Communism is responsible for more death than any other political movement during the 20th century.

Twentieth Century Atlas - Death Tolls

MURDER BY COMMUNISM


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...


Oh look, Jake agrees with the left wing hack.  Who would have guessed?  Still waiting for a credible link.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



Oh, look, facts are facts, and S. J. can't handle it.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up.  I'll wait while you go fetch some.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



You are not the standard for creditability, S. J.

No one, even your own side, trusts you for critical, fair evaluation.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


Can't find any, can you?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up.  I'll wait while you go fetch some.


No need to.

Once I provided a source to my initial claim, the burden of proof shifts to the objector (which is you), to provide evidence to show their (your) objection is not frivolous  and has merit.

So where's your evidence to prove what I said was false?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

daveman said:


> What?s FAIR? ? FAIR: Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting
> *As a progressive group*, FAIR believes that structural reform is ultimately needed to break up the dominant media conglomerates, establish independent public broadcasting and promote strong non-profit sources of information.​They TELL you they're biased.


Nice hat *Dave*!


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up.  I'll wait while you go fetch some.
> ...


The burden of proof is on you to provide a credible source, not a link to a propaganda site.  I don't have to prove shit.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> *Is Islam as violent as some people claim?*
> 
> *Not according to historical data!*
> 
> ...



Liberals are you aware that  Muslims oppose most of your agenda that you support.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



jakes always on the opposite end of a discussion where Republicans are concerned.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 7, 2013)

JakeStarkey said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Back up the biased source with one that is not. Pretty simple request. It is not my job to prove a negative, it is your job to prove your positive statements with credible acceptable sites.

As was already asked, if I source an Arab site that claims the Holocaust never happened is that proof it did not happen?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Liberals are you aware that  Muslims oppose most of your agenda that you support.


And historical facts, say your hysterical facts, are full of shit!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> The burden of proof is on you to provide a credible source, not a link to a propaganda site.  I don't have to prove shit.


You'd be thrown out of court, if you tried that shit in front of a judge.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > If they're facts, then you should be able to find other CREDIBLE links to back it up.  I'll wait while you go fetch some.
> ...



Doesn't work that way bub, it is your claim and your responsibility to prove it. AGAIN if I source an Arab site as proof the Holocaust never happened is that legit?


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > The burden of proof is on you to provide a credible source, not a link to a propaganda site.  I don't have to prove shit.
> ...


A judge would instruct you to present a credible source for your argument or throw YOU out of court.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Doesn't work that way bub, it is your claim and your responsibility to prove it. AGAIN if I source an Arab site as proof the Holocaust never happened is that legit?


I did prove it.

What some asshole thinks of that website, has nothing to do with the fact I provided my corroborative citation.

Anyone can sit back and dismiss the evidence.  But in a court of law, you have to provide evidence that your objection, has merit.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> A judge would instruct you to present a credible source for your argument or throw YOU out of court.


No he wouldn't. Judges only ask for evidence to be provided.

It's up to the ones who object, to prove that evidence is bullshit.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > Doesn't work that way bub, it is your claim and your responsibility to prove it. AGAIN if I source an Arab site as proof the Holocaust never happened is that legit?
> ...



Actually in a Court of law your evidence must be from a known reliable source. Your source is not reliable. In a debate which is what this is supposed to be you are required to source your evidence and it must be reliable and acceptable to the other side. In a Debate one is not required to prove a negative, one is required to prove the positive, YOU made a claim, back it up with a source that is not know to lie deceive and mislead.


----------



## Caroljo (Dec 7, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



I've been googling this stuff and nothing comes up besides the site that was posted....so it's only an opinion of that site, not facts.  I think Billy should show us some other proof, or admit he's just a hack.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Liberals are you aware that  Muslims oppose most of your agenda that you support.
> ...



Gay marriage?
Womens right?
Freedom from religion?
What issues that you support would Muslims support?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Gay marriage?
> Womens right?
> Freedom from religion?
> What issues that you support would Muslims support?


I don't give a shit what Muslims do (and do not) support.

I'm an Irish Catholic.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

Caroljo said:


> I've been googling this stuff and nothing comes up besides the site that was posted....so it's only an opinion of that site, not facts.  I think Billy should show us some other proof, or admit he's just a hack.


That's not providing evidence the claim was bullshit.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> Actually in a Court of law your evidence must be from a known reliable source. Your source is not reliable. In a debate which is what this is supposed to be you are required to source your evidence and it must be reliable and acceptable to the other side. In a Debate one is not required to prove a negative, one is required to prove the positive, YOU made a claim, back it up with a source that is not know to lie deceive and mislead.


No judge ever questions you on the reliability of your source.

That's ridiculous!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Gay marriage?
> ...



But you're defending them. They oppose issues you support


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> But you're defending them. They oppose issues you support


I'm not defending them.

I don't believe in jihad.  I don't condone the rocket attacks.  I think going ballistic over cartoons is ridiculous.

I'm just stating an historical fact to keep things in perspective.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > But you're defending them. They oppose issues you support
> ...



OH so you're saying Muslims commit jihad and go off half cocked?
Dude your position is looking real bad about now.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OH so you're saying Muslims commit jihad and go off half cocked?


Dude, that's not news!



bigrebnc1775 said:


> Dude your position is looking real bad about now.


Why is that?


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > A judge would instruct you to present a credible source for your argument or throw YOU out of court.
> ...


You would be charged with contempt for wasting the court's time.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OH so you're saying Muslims commit jihad and go off half cocked?
> ...



ok so you say you are not defending Muslims? What was the purpose of this thread?


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


To make a fool out of himself.  And he succeeded!


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > Billo_Really said:
> ...



Why do liberals defend muslims the way they do?


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> ok so you say you are not defending Muslims? What was the purpose of this thread?


That a lot of the shit being said about some Islamic threat, is bullshit.

There are fanatics in every society.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 7, 2013)

S.J. said:


> To make a fool out of himself.  And he succeeded!


I wouldn't comment on things above your pay grade?


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > ok so you say you are not defending Muslims? What was the purpose of this thread?
> ...



Read what you say and then tell me what issues that you support muslims also support.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 7, 2013)

In the 20th Century there were actually 231 million deaths from conflicts of all types.

Of that number 12,804,500 can easily be identified as caused by Islamic rebellions or Muslim run Countries.

That would be 5.5 percent of all war related deaths directly atributed to Islam or Muslim policies.

http://www.cissm.umd.edu/papers/files/deathswarsconflictsjune52006.pdf

The table begins on page 73 I believe. The total is available on page 3 I think.

The table does not include anything before 1945 so the number is actually higher. Neither WW1 or WW2 should be counted as Islamic or Muslim caused deaths, BUT Turkey and the Armenia would as would the Philippines and other areas that are predominately Islamic.

Of particular note is this table only covers 41 million deaths from approximately 1945 to 2000.  When one factors in that number the rounded up 13 million caused by Islam is rather more significant.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...


In his case, it must be stupidity.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 7, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> In the 20th Century there were actually 231 million deaths from conflicts of all types.
> 
> Of that number 12,804,500 can easily be identified as caused by Islamic rebellions or Muslim run Countries.
> 
> ...


Sarge you are going to way to much trouble he's been busted.
He's not defending muslims
But has no purpose for this thread.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 7, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> In the 20th Century there were actually 231 million deaths from conflicts of all types.
> 
> Of that number 12,804,500 can easily be identified as caused by Islamic rebellions or Muslim run Countries.
> 
> ...



So from 1945 to 1999 approximately 13 million deaths due to conflict either initiated by Islam or supported by Islam have occurred, during the same period 41 million deaths can be attributed to conflicts of all kinds doing at least 1000 deaths.

So since 1945 31.6 percent of all deaths occurring due to conflict have been caused by or as a result of Muslim actions. 

I would say that is a worrisome fact.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 7, 2013)

What the hell difference does it make anyway?  It doesn't change the fact that muslims like to fly planes into buildings, set off roadside bombs, cut off people's heads, etc.  ALL because their victims don't embrace Islam.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

S.J. said:


> What the hell difference does it make anyway?  It doesn't change the fact that muslims like to fly planes into buildings, set off roadside bombs, cut off people's heads, etc.  ALL because their victims don't embrace Islam.


That has nothing to do with Islam, it's because we won't stop bombing the shit out of their country's, you fucking skumbag asshole!


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

RetiredGySgt said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > In the 20th Century there were actually 231 million deaths from conflicts of all types.
> ...


I'm still reviewing the data you provided, so I can't comment on that just yet. 

I just wanted to take the opportunity to compliment you on a quality post.


----------



## S.J. (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > What the hell difference does it make anyway?  It doesn't change the fact that muslims like to fly planes into buildings, set off roadside bombs, cut off people's heads, etc.  ALL because their victims don't embrace Islam.
> ...


Ooh, I think somebody's mad because they're losing the argument.  And BTW, it's "countries" and "scumbags", not "country's and skumbags".  If you had finished 7th grade you would already know that, you fucking moron.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

S.J. said:


> Ooh, I think somebody's mad because they're losing the argument.  And BTW, it's "countries" and "scumbags", not "country's and skumbags".  If you had finished 7th grade you would already know that, you fucking moron.


Don't be talking about my 7th grade, dickhead, that's the year I discovered girls.

*In 6th grade, girls had coodies.

In 7th grade it was, "What was that!"​*


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > But you're defending them. They oppose issues you support
> ...





bigrebnc1775 said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > bigrebnc1775 said:
> ...



Bump.


----------



## Billo_Really (Dec 8, 2013)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> OH so you're saying Muslims commit jihad and go off half cocked?
> 
> Bump.


I'm saying there is no such thing as jihad.

You cannot kill in the name of God.  Period.

They're nothing but murderers.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> bigrebnc1775 said:
> 
> 
> > OH so you're saying Muslims commit jihad and go off half cocked?
> ...



OH so you lie? You said you were not defending them BECAUSE



Billo_Really said:


> I'm not defending them.
> 
> I don't believe in jihad.  I don't condone the rocket attacks.  I think going ballistic over cartoons is ridiculous.
> 
> I'm just stating an historical fact to keep things in perspective.


----------



## RetiredGySgt (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> RetiredGySgt said:
> 
> 
> > RetiredGySgt said:
> ...



I did not count the Soviet Invasion of Afghanistan in the totals. Since the Afghans did not start that conflict. One could argue that they did of course since the Soviets used a puppet Government to authorize their troop deployment.


----------



## toastman (Dec 8, 2013)

Alfalfa said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...



HAHAHA you unmasked nothing. 

LOL even on other forums you bring up Zionists. You're fuckin obsessed !!

Get a life


----------



## toastman (Dec 8, 2013)

Billo_Really said:


> S.J. said:
> 
> 
> > Ooh, I think somebody's mad because they're losing the argument.  And BTW, it's "countries" and "scumbags", not "country's and skumbags".  If you had finished 7th grade you would already know that, you fucking moron.
> ...



You have got to be the most immature idiot here. All you have are your stupid insults. Are you 9 years old ?


----------



## S.J. (Dec 8, 2013)

toastman said:


> Billo_Really said:
> 
> 
> > S.J. said:
> ...


No, he's 12.  He just discovered girls.


----------



## Bloodrock44 (Dec 8, 2013)

Bottom line... Jew hating Arab terrorist lovers will always defend Islamic terrorism and claim they're just anti-Zionism.


----------

