America and its response to genocides

[JayATL]

Lol, I'm not the guy who uses personal slander and screaming like a Disney-promoted Teenstar to get my point across. It's you. In every discussion you're part of.

And it's not for "a single intelliegent writer in India, politician , state dept" to flay US role in 1971, US state department did that.

And to preempt your pathetic "I'dd like to see one where Indian state dept went WTF are we doing supplying arms to Sri lankans to push a genocide on Tamils!" argument once again, this wasn't a "Indian response on genocide" thread to begin with, it was a "US response to genocide".

India didn't preach what it didn't practice with regards to genocide, US did.

Subhratri.

well in that case a disney teen is educating and making your genocide claim a mockery. By the way a US citizen replied back to the accusation of genocide.

And it's not for "a single intelliegent writer in India, politician , state dept" to flay US role in 1971, US state department did that.

It's not- because it isn't true... that's why. The world and every country would have writers who of all things, if your claim were true, would have seen them agree. I'm not saying the smart media chose to ignore a single murder- Rather am saying that on a monumental claim of US promoting genocide in 71 ( per your claim) - not a word was written by any of the intelligentsia.

And why can't we talk about my counter claim? We are discussing standard of claiming genocide. why can't I introduce examples of it? which freaking school of debate did you go to? Psudeo intellect kind?

 

[civfanatic]

The U.S. themselves are the greatest perpetrators of genocide in the past two hundred years. There really should be a separate thread on that; I think I'll start one when I get the time.

 

[Galaxy]

Whenever I think of US war, 1st thing that comes to my mind is Vietnam war. 1 Million died with biggest ever bombarding/Genocide. US is biggest threat for this world (after Islamic extremist)

 

[civfanatic]

Whenever I think of US war, 1st thing that comes to my mind is Vietnam war. 1 Million died with biggest ever bombarding/Genocide. US is biggest threat for this world (after Islamic extremist)

More bombs were dropped on Vietnam than by all sides in WWII. It was the most devastated country in modern military history.

 

[Damian]

Whenever I think of US war, 1st thing that comes to my mind is Vietnam war. 1 Million died with biggest ever bombarding/Genocide.

So it seems You know very little if anything about world and Vietnam war, and one point You did not notice, it was a war, war to support an US allie, South Vietnam against socialist threat from north. Maybe You should ask how many people died from the hands of Vietcong and NVA?

Stereotypes are very easy to accept, it is much harder to ask questions and seek answers on our own.

US is biggest threat for this world (after Islamic extremist)

Yes, so maybe You should destroy US, it is a threat in Your eyes, so come on, give us a beautifull show of hatred, come on, show us real hate!

This is what I like in people like You, on the one hand they are ultra pacifists with saint anger against someones actions, but in the end they are the same or even worser.

The U.S. themselves are the greatest perpetrators of genocide in the past two hundred years.

Of course You have some proof for that? Oh wait wait wait, no, You will not accuse individuals responsible for orders or actions, no, You will show us a hate show for the whole country and nation, what will be next? A rascism towards white people?

Hypocrites are everywhere it seems.

 

[Daredevil]

It's not- because it isn't true... that's why. The world and every country would have writers who of all things, if your claim were true, would have seen them agree. I'm not saying the smart media chose to ignore a single murder- Rather am saying that on a monumental claim of US promoting genocide in 71 ( per your claim) - not a word was written by any of the intelligentsia.

Let me give you an analogy to see if US has directly or indirectly supported genocide of Bangladeshis by Pakistani Army or not.

You have a 5th standard class with bunch of students and a strong ward of the class. The strong ward (lets say "A") claims that he is a good and upright person and will protect the other guys from getting bullied by others in the class because he is strong and morally upright. Now there is a spat between two students "P" and "B". P is beating shit out of B and B is calling for help from "A" but "A" ignores him because "P" is a good buddy of him. Now there is another ward "I", who is not as strong as "A" but strong enough, comes to the rescue of "B". "I" starts beating "P" to make him leave "B" alone but then "A" comes out of no where and says to "I" to leave "P" alone because he is his buddy and threatens to beat up "I" if he continues to interfere "P" beating "B".

Now what is the role of "A" here in the context of the claims he made that he is a good, moral, upright and strong person and will come to the rescue of the weak getting bullied??.

1) A looked away while "P" beating shit out of "B"
2) A not only looked away but didn't come to the rescue of "B" when B called for help.
3) A not only looked away and didn't come to rescue of "B" but also threatened "I" who was coming to the rescue of "B" to protect his buddy "P".
4) None of the above.

Choose the answer and you will know what was the real role of "A".

Here. A = America, P = Pakistan, B = Bangladesh, I = India.

 

[JayATL]

Let me give you an analogy to see if US has directly or indirectly supported genocide of Bangladeshis by Pakistani Army or not.

You have a 5th standard class with bunch of students and a strong ward of the class. The strong ward (lets say "A") claims that he is a good and upright person and will protect the other guys from getting bullied by others in the class because he is strong and morally upright. Now there is a spat between two students "P" and "B". P is beating shit out of B and B is calling for help from "A" but "A" ignores him because "P" is a good busy of him. Now there is another ward "I", who is not as strong as "A" but strong enough, comes to the rescue of "B". "I" starts beating "P" to make him leave "B" alone but then "A" comes out of no where and says to "I" that leave "P" alone because he is his buddy and threatens "I" if he continues to interfere "P" beating "B".

Now what is the role of "A" here in the context of the claims he made that he is a good, moral, upright and strong person and will come to the rescue of the weak getting bullied??.

1) A looked away while "P" beating shit out of "B"
2) A not only looked away but didn't come to the rescue of "B" when B called for help.
3) A not only looked away and didn't come to rescue of "B" but also threatened "I" who was coming to the rescue of "B" to protect his buddy "P".
4) None of the above.

Choose the answer and you will know what was the real role of "A".

Here. A = America, P = Pakistan, B = Bangladesh, I = India.

Holy shit dude -- in the world of communication and analogies, yours is -- well leaves me with Uh why so complex? A B, P I ---

dude here is a simply analogy for ya --- in the world of "promoting genocide" - the word promoting is used- when it means actively working to enhance it.

US sitting in sidelines with a showmanship act of some naval ships was more about its attitude about India ( way way way way back then_ its totally reversed for over a decade now)- than its actual stance/ belief about east pakistan's genocide. get it?

 

[Damian]

^ Did You consider that this is normal situation, everyone supports it's allies or friends, from the moral point of view, who will You support, You allie or friend or just buddy or someone that You don't know?

It is very easy to say about what is good or wrong when we stand on the one side... it's actually funny that Indians are accusing US for their support for Pakistan but Americans do not accusing Indians for support to Banghladesh.

Let leave genocide and support itself on a while but IMHO from what I see the point is not that US supported country x, or that in view of some people they do not done what was right.

The reason is that US supported Pakistan, and Pakistan is seen as enemy, this is the only and real reason... so, attacking Pakistan become a bit passe and it is now time to find new enemy?

Not that I take any side, just simple observation.

 

[Daredevil]

^^^Its not possible to wake a person who is pretending to asleep

US threatened India from attacking Pakistan Army which was doing an active genocide of Bangladeshis does indicate, to any person with minuscule amounts of grey matter, that it did directly or indirectly supported what Pakistan Army was doing then.

 

[death.by.chocolate]

To put it simply, US promoted genocide in Bangladesh by posturing against the force that was trying to put a stop to the genocide (India).

Eventually, Soviet posturing neutralized US in the theatre, and India went on to put a stop to the atrocities, but the precious time wasted in neutralizing the threat of a US intervention cost the lives of countless people of Bangladesh.

That is a common misconception, the 7th fleet arrived after Pakistan surrendered and had no bearing on the outcome. The fleet remained in the Bay of Bengal for a few weeks and assisted Pakistan with covert evacuation of key personnel. Soviet subs, trailed the fleet for the duration but this is something US fleets had grown accustomed to during the cold war. So in a nutshell, the 7th Fleet had no influence on the 71' East Pakistan war. The Soviets did not deter us from maintaining presence in the Bay of Bengal.

 

[Galaxy]

So it seems You know very little if anything about world and Vietnam war, and one point You did not notice, it was a war, war to support an US allie, South Vietnam against socialist threat from north. Maybe You should ask how many people died from the hands of Vietcong and NVA?

Stereotypes are very easy to accept, it is much harder to ask questions and seek answers on our own.

After the defeat of the French in 1954, the US began supporting the government of South Vietnam with funds and military advisors. The regime of Ngo Dinh Diem was extremely corrupt and very unpopular with the people of South Vietnam.The US (CIA) did prevent the fair elections because they knew the communists would win. And they ignored the United Nations plebiscite too. US knew south Vietnam will be merged with North Vietnam with China/Russian comrades. US wanted to keep big influence on south Vietnam due to geo-political reason (Also due to Laos/Cambodia). When there was some kind of civil war among Vietnamese, US thought North Vietnam will take South with the help of Russia who was Super Power at that time and competitor of Russia in cold war. So, US started helping south Vietnam (25% only supported government @ that time and 75% wanted to go with North Vietnam). Hence, US failed to invade and in frustration they killed Millions of worst kind of genocide. Still Lost at end. What happened NEXT ??? Vietnam are one now with Communist government (Hates China but good terms with Russia). You can Kill people but can't stop Ideology.

Yes, so maybe You should destroy US, it is a threat in Your eyes, so come on, give us a beautifull show of hatred, come on, show us real hate!

This is what I like in people like You, on the one hand they are ultra pacifists with saint anger against someones actions, but in the end they are the same or even worser.

Why we will destroy US when they did no wrong to us ? I don't hate US, Indeed I like. The topic is US Genocide happened ? YES, It happened. There are many examples.

Of course You have some proof for that? Oh wait wait wait, no, You will not accuse individuals responsible for orders or actions, no, You will show us a hate show for the whole country and nation, what will be next? A rascism towards white people?

Hypocrites are everywhere it seems.

I like Russian, German. Who are they ?? People from Mars or Nigeria ? If not, Then I am fair enough with my opinion. Talk with facts and not with troll.

 

[Damian]

Did You ask Yourself such questions like, did Americans were aware of genocides, did they tried to force on Pakistanis stop of genocides by helping them (we help You but You will stop genocides) etc?

Without questions and answers any statements are false.

 

[JayATL]

Damien, reply back to galaxy and civicfanatic is futile. they are the most whacked out/ devoid of single intelligent thought here. just ignore the extremes on the margin...

 

[LurkerBaba]

did Americans were aware of genocides

Writing it down again

You failed to see the first post of this thread

Biggest proponents for Muslim genocides are Chinese ... Chinese being the worst of it. Look at their support, and I'm not speaking in spirit, but rather monetary support of Sudan. Here is Syria where Muslims are being killed in ways where people there and its neighbors are calling it a " a massacre, slaughter etc" .

Higher than mountains deeper than seas-- but when it comes to genocidal maniacs, no Muslims are to be free!

To which DD replied

US, China both are supporters of Genocide when it suits their national interests. I see no difference between China and US in this case.

This is purpose of the thread

did Americans were aware of genocides.

Read the whole thread, before replying

It's interesting that nobody cited the Blood Telegram from Dhaka (look it up) to nail anyone who doubts that the US blatantly promoted rape as weapon of war and genocide in 1971.

 

[Galaxy]

I will not say anything about Bangladesh as US was not directly involved. It was all about Pakistan and her genocide. US helped Pakistan but i don't know weather US knew or not about Genocide.

But in case of Vietnam, Yes, US killed Millions of poor Vietnamese by worst kind of genocide just for the sake of strategic influence.

 

[Daredevil]

^ Did You consider that this is normal situation, everyone supports it's allies or friends, from the moral point of view, who will You support, You allie or friend or just buddy or someone that You don't know?

Was genocide a normal situation??. In this case, if US was on sidelines without having to send its 7th fleet to Bay of Bengal to threaten India, it would have not come under as a support of genocide. But it did because of its support to Pakistan Army which was on a genocide spree.

It is very easy to say about what is good or wrong when we stand on the one side... it's actually funny that Indians are accusing US for their support for Pakistan but Americans do not accusing Indians for support to Banghladesh.

What did India support?. India was flooded 10s of millions of refugees from Bangladesh and it has acted in its interest to stop the genocide to prevent the flood of refugees. How can you compare the action of US to India in this context. Did it come to rescue of Bangladeshis or did it come to rescue of genocidal Pakistani Army?

Let leave genocide and support itself on a while but IMHO from what I see the point is not that US supported country x, or that in view of some people they do not done what was right.

The reason is that US supported Pakistan, and Pakistan is seen as enemy, this is the only and real reason... so, attacking Pakistan become a bit passe and it is now time to find new enemy?

Not that I take any side, just simple observation

.

Pakistan was fighting its wars with American supplied weapons and jets during that time, But that was not the point, the point was the support of US to Pakistani Army despite knowing the wrong doing of Pakistani Army. It is like protecting a criminal despite his criminality.

 

[Damian]

After the defeat of the French in 1954, the US began supporting the government of South Vietnam with funds and military advisors. The regime of Ngo Dinh Diem was extremely corrupt and very unpopular with the people of South Vietnam.The US (CIA) did prevent the fair elections because they knew the communists would win. And they ignored the United Nations plebiscite too. US knew south Vietnam will be merged with North Vietnam with China/Russian comrades. US wanted to keep big influence on south Vietnam due to geo-political reason. When there was some kind of civil war among Vietnamese, US thought North Vietnam will take South with the help of Russia who was Super Power at that time and competitor of Russia in cold war. So, US started helping south Vietnam (25% only supported government @ that time and 75% wanted to go with North Vietnam). Hence, US failed to invade and in frustration they killed Millions of worst kind of genocide. Still Lost at end. What happened NEXT ??? Vietnam are one now with Communist government (Hates China but good terms with Russia). You can Kill people but can't stop Ideology.

1) US goverment made mistake, they supported current (then) goverment of South Vietnam, they should change it for someone more popular but not communist.
2) Communism bring more worse to Vietnam than anything else, compare Vietnam to South Korea supported by US, who had more profits?
3) US did not loose war in military aspect, they loose it in propaganda aspect and KGB sponsored hippie skunks forced goverment to withdraw forces (South Vietnam goverment lasted some time after withdraw of US forces, but without support they loose).
4) US as a country was not reposnible for killing of incocents, also the North Vietnam forces killed more South Vietnam citizens than any US bombings, learn history.

Why we will destroy US when they did no wrong to us ? I don't hate US, Indeed I like. The topic is US Genocide happened ? YES, It happened. There are many examples.

But You are indeed spreading heate, You are not talking hey this guy is bad, or this one, no, You are talking about nation, nation can't be responsible for all actions of individuals in armed forces or in goverment.

I like Russian, German. Who are they ?? People from Mars ? If not, Then I am fair enough with my opinion. Talk with facts and not with troll.

And in the same time You are calling some nation, country a threat to world, how people from this nation can feel? What will happen if I will call Your nation threat to a world no matters if it is true or not, do You see a difference? I don't like such stance, that the whole nations are accused for something...

 

[Galaxy]

OP started the thread " America and its response to genocides " But he forgot that US is one of the biggest supporter of Genocide.

Thread title is hilarious.

May be he is more American than Indo-American ?

 

[LurkerBaba]

And in the same time You are calling some nation, country a threat to world, how people from this nation can feel? What will happen if I will call Your nation threat to a world no matters if it is true or not, do You see a difference? I don't like such stance, that the whole nations are accused for something...

Ugh ! For the last time, you should direct such line of thought to the original poster (see first page of this thread)

Biggest proponents for Muslim genocides are Chinese ... Chinese being the worst of it.

 

[Damian]

Read the whole thread, before replying

The document was written after the whole action, think!

I will not say anything about Bangladesh as US was not directly involved. It was all about Pakistan and her genocide. US helped Pakistan but i don't know weather US knew or not about Genocide.

Aha, so You don't know, but You will accuse some country because this is how it will work with Your ideological and political agenda.

But in case of Vietnam, Yes, US killed Millions of poor Vietnamese by worst kind of genocide just for the sake of strategic influence.

These milions were killed by their brothers from the north, You have no idea about history and what socialists are doing after they will "free" other people.

Was genocide a normal situation??. In this case, if US was on sidelines without having to send its 7th fleet to Bay of Bengal to threaten India, it would have not come under as a support of genocide. But it did because of its support to Pakistan Army which was on a genocide spree.

Once again, did US goverment was aware about genocides when they were making this decision? Did they? And if not, so they did not support genocides, they were supporting an ally, and if they were knowing about genocides, maybe they wanted to prevent a war, as I said, We will help but You will stop Your actions and back to status quo.

Think goddamned!

What did India support?. India was flooded 10s of millions of refugees from Bangladesh and it has acted in its interest to stop the genocide to prevent the flood of refugees. How can you compare the action of US to India in this context. Did it come to rescue of Bangladeshis or did it come to rescue of genocidal Pakistani Army?

Oh, so in such situation You are even worser than US, You acted only in Your interest to stop flood of unwanted refugees.

Pakistan was fighting its wars with American supplied weapons and jets during that time, But that was not the point, the point was the support of US to Pakistani Army despite knowing the wrong doing of Pakistani Army. It is like protecting a criminal despite his criminality.

It is very false and naive statement, how do You know what were intentions and knowledge of US goverment? Oh wait I know, who needs such answers, they just supported our enemy, so they are ze evil imperialists!

Ugh ! For the last time, you should direct such line of thought to the original poster (see first page of this thread)

My words are directed to everyone.