Genghis Khan statue on the Mongolian steepes

[SlyPokerDog]

That's amazingly beautiful!

Link if you want to see a bigger picture -

 

[Natebishop3]

Hmmm.... will Sly get annoyed if I bring up Reddit again?

 

[Further]

If anyone is interested, Dan Carlin has a history podcast called Hardcore History on iTunes. He just did a five part awesomely done podcast series on Genghis Khan, in total about ten hours. If you like history and podcasts, check it out.

 

[THE HCP]

Hmmm.... will Sly get annoyed if I bring up Reddit again?

explain this inside joke please. Who is Reddit?

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Hmmm.... will Sly get annoyed if I bring up Reddit again?

I didn't get annoyed last time. Just thought it was funny one week you're posting, "you should go to Reddit" and the next "hey, you copied that from Reddit!"

 

[SlyPokerDog]

explain this inside joke please. Who is Reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/

 

[Natebishop3]

explain this inside joke please. Who is Reddit?

http://www.reddit.com/

A lot of the things that get posted on this forum and on Facebook actually originate on Reddit, or first go viral on Reddit. It's a complete mishmash of funny pictures, videos, news, information, and anything else you can think of. If you have an interest, there is most likely a sub-reddit dedicated to it.

I just like to poke fun at Sly because I'll see something on Reddit and then an hour later Sly will post it on here

 

[magnifier661]

It's actually pretty amazing. Too bad Mongolia is a shit country and probably the last place I would want to visit.

 

[Natebishop3]

I didn't get annoyed last time. Just thought it was funny one week you're posting, "you should go to Reddit" and the next "hey, you copied that from Reddit!"

Oh, it seemed like you got a little annoyed with me.

 

[Haakzilla]

...yeah, that is ALMOST as cool as Crazy Horse in South Dakota!

 

[Further]

Except that G Khan was responsible for the deaths of twenty million people, kind of surprised how history looks so well upon him.

 

[Natebishop3]

That statue really doesn't look like it's actually there.

 

[donkiez]

http://www.reddit.com/

A lot of the things that get posted on this forum and on Facebook actually originate on Reddit, or first go viral on Reddit. It's a complete mishmash of funny pictures, videos, news, information, and anything else you can think of. If you have an interest, there is most likely a sub-reddit dedicated to it.

I just like to poke fun at Sly because I'll see something on Reddit and then an hour later Sly will post it on here

yes a mishmash of everything including spacedicks, gonewild and picturesofdeadbabies. All of those subreddits are NSFW and only one is worth looking at, Ill let you guys figure out which one.

 

[ABM]

Oh, it seemed like you got a little annoyed with me.

Don't fall for it!!!

 

[speeds]

Looks like something out of WOW.

 

[maxiep]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genghis_Khan_Equestrian_Statue

 

[jlprk]

Except that G Khan was responsible for the deaths of twenty million people, kind of surprised how history looks so well upon him.

Oh come on. The Wolves were bad long before he got there.

 

[huevonkiller]

Except that G Khan was responsible for the deaths of twenty million people, kind of surprised how history looks so well upon him.

Yes I had similar thoughts as well.

 

[donkiez]

Except that G Khan was responsible for the deaths of twenty million people, kind of surprised how history looks so well upon him.

You mean like Alexander the Great? Its mostly because he won, history loves the victor. His accomplishments were also very impressive. He conqured the known world. Also interesting fact that 1 in 200 men alive today can trace their DNA directly back to Genghis Khan.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/g...ect-descendants-of-genghis-khan/#.UWBhFpPU9PM

 

[Further]

You mean like Alexander the Great? Its mostly because he won, history loves the victor. His accomplishments were also very impressive. He conqured the known world. Also interesting fact that 1 in 200 men alive today can trace their DNA directly back to Genghis Khan.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/g...ect-descendants-of-genghis-khan/#.UWBhFpPU9PM

Well, you have a bit of a point, but Alexander the Great killed hundreds of thousands of people, vs tens of millions by G Khan. His conquests were very impressive. You are correct that the victors write the history, however there has been more history written and taught lately that tries to present both sides views and not just that of the victors. Native American history, slavery in America, Vietnam Nam, all more recent that the Mongols or ATG, so perhaps it's only recent history in which there is an attempt at more honest teachings.

 

[donkiez]

I think you hit the nail on the head with the recent history part. Its easier to be outraged and want the true story out there when the event effects you personally, that includes you, your brother, dad, granddad etc. Once you get into the ancient ancestors it just seems like history and how things were done back then. Until recently raping and pillaging were the benefits of winning a war, along with remaining alive. People just accept that's how things were back then. I cant even imagine the horror those people felt seeing a battalion of mounted Mongolian warriors heading for their city. Same thing for Viking raiders, Roman conqurers, conquistadors, etc. The historical impact, battle tactics, and achievements of all these brutal warriors can still be admired though. For me the biggest tragedies of these times are when they not only wipe out a population but when they try to destroy their history as well. The Siege of Tenochtitlan is a great example of all of those.

An interesting thought experiment along those lines is how would the world view Hitler today had he won?

 

[Further]

I think you hit the nail on the head with the recent history part. Its easier to be outraged and want the true story out there when the event effects you personally, that includes you, your brother, dad, granddad etc. Once you get into the ancient ancestors it just seems like history and how things were done back then. Until recently raping and pillaging were the benefits of winning a war, along with remaining alive. People just accept that's how things were back then. I cant even imagine the horror those people felt seeing a battalion of mounted Mongolian warriors heading for their city. Same thing for Viking raiders, Roman conqurers, conquistadors, etc. The historical impact, battle tactics, and achievements of all these brutal warriors can still be admired though. For me the biggest tragedies of these times are when they not only wipe out a population but when they try to destroy their history as well. The Siege of Tenochtitlan is a great example of all of those.

An interesting thought experiment along those lines is how would the world view Hitler today had he won?

Repped.

 

[VanillaGorilla]

I recommend this book: Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World

Good read.

The book suggests that the western depiction of the Mongols as terrible savages that destroyed all civilization was due to the Mongol's dealings with the opposing hereditary aristocracies. In battle, the book claims, the Mongols always annihilated these ruling classes in order to better subdue the general population. Since, according to the book, it was these aristocratic classes that could write, their treatment at the hands of the Mongols was what was recorded throughout history. However, still following the book's line of argument, what was less well known was the treatment of the general population (peasants, tradesmen, merchants) under Mongol rule. The book states that in general Mongol rule was less burdensome on the masses due to lighter taxes, tolerance of local customs & religions, less capricious administration, and universal education for all.

These benefits were only enjoyed by populations that surrendered immediately to the Mongol invaders. Those populations that resisted in any way could be annihilated in a massacre as a warning to other towns/cities. These massacres were a method of psychological warfare that was used on populations not yet conquered. The resulting terror helped color the historical portrayal of the Mongols.
Since the Mongols were horsemen of the steppes and didn't possess any arts or crafts of their own, they were dependent on taxes from the subjugated peoples for wealth and luxury goods. Weatherford's book claims that the Mongols sought to increase that wealth by encouraging their subjects to be more productive and enterprising instead of increasing the tax burden on them. They did this by sponsoring lucrative international trade, and it is alleged that they also encouraged scientific advances and improved agriculture and production methods. Many innovations came from the combination of technologies from different cultures within their huge empire.

 

[jlprk]

Numbers like 20 million are propaganda. Remember Denny's posts claiming that Saddam "was responsible for" (that word can get very indirect) 1 million deaths, after an Iran-Iraq war pushed by Reagan. Most of the deaths were Iranians, who had to use labor-intensive attacks causing many death, since Reagan was arming Saddam but not the Ayatolah with WMDs.

Now that the Soviet Union isn't around to counter our propaganda, the mantra begins that Stalin killed 30 million people. Yes, Ukrainian farmers who wouldn't collectivize starved, but 30M out of a total of 115M in Russia (165M in the whole Soviet Union) is ridiculous.

 

[Denny Crane]

Numbers like 20 million are propaganda. Remember Denny's posts claiming that Saddam "was responsible for" (that word can get very indirect) 1 million deaths, after an Iran-Iraq war pushed by Reagan. Most of the deaths were Iranians, who had to use labor-intensive attacks causing many death, since Reagan was arming Saddam but not the Ayatolah with WMDs.

Now that the Soviet Union isn't around to counter our propaganda, the mantra begins that Stalin killed 30 million people. Yes, Ukrainian farmers who wouldn't collectivize starved, but 30M out of a total of 115M in Russia (165M in the whole Soviet Union) is ridiculous.

You knew Genghis Khan in person. Was he really to the left of Ghandi like Stalin and Mao were?

 

[Denny Crane]

Numbers like 20 million are propaganda. Remember Denny's posts claiming that Saddam "was responsible for" (that word can get very indirect) 1 million deaths, after an Iran-Iraq war pushed by Reagan. Most of the deaths were Iranians, who had to use labor-intensive attacks causing many death, since Reagan was arming Saddam but not the Ayatolah with WMDs.

Now that the Soviet Union isn't around to counter our propaganda, the mantra begins that Stalin killed 30 million people. Yes, Ukrainian farmers who wouldn't collectivize starved, but 30M out of a total of 115M in Russia (165M in the whole Soviet Union) is ridiculous.

Donald Riegle, a Democrat, headed a Senate committee that investigated the transfer of WMDs and precursors to Iraq. Silly thing is we sent lots of biological weapon precursors but no chemical weapons. The weapons used by Saddam against Iran and his own people were of German and Russian origin, according to doctors without borders who analyzed soil samples where WMDs were used.

I'm sure you think Reagan sold all the MIGs, SCUDs, and AK47s to Iraq, too.

Anyhow, the figure for Stalin's deaths:

http://www.distributedrepublic.net/archives/2006/05/01/how-many-did-stalin-really-murder/

By far, the consensus figure for those that Joseph Stalin murdered when he ruled the Soviet Union is 20,000,000. You probably have come across this many times. Just to see how numerous this total is, look up “Stalin” and “20 million” in Google, and you will get 183,000 links. Not all settle just on the 20,000,000. Some links will make this the upper and some the lower limit in a range. Yet, virtually no one who uses this estimate has gone to the source, for if they did and knew something about Soviet history, they would realize that the 20,000,000 is a gross under estimate of what is likely the Stalin's true human toll.

The figure comes from the book by Robert Conquest, The Great Terror: Stalin’s Purge of the Thirties (Macmillan 1968). In his appendix on casualty figures, he reviews a number of estimates of those that were killed under Stalin, and calculates that the number of executions 1936 to 1938 was probably about 1,000,000; that from 1936 to 1950 about 12,000,000 died in the camps; and 3,500,000 died in the 1930-1936 collectivization. Overall, he concludes:


Thus we get a figure of 20 million dead, which is almost certainly too low and might require an increase of 50 percent or so, as the debit balance of the Stalin regime for twenty-three years.
In all the times I've seen Conquest’s 20,000,000 reported, not once do I recall seeing his qualification attached to it.

Considering that Stalin died in 1953, note what Conquest did not include -- camp deaths after 1950, and before 1936; executions 1939-53; the vast deportation of the people of captive nations into the camps, and their deaths 1939-1953; the massive deportation within the Soviet Union of minorities 1941-1944; and their deaths; and those the Soviet Red Army and secret police executed throughout Eastern Europe after their conquest during 1944-1945 is omitted. Moreover, omitted is the deadly Ukrainian famine Stalin purposely imposed on the region and that killed 5 million in 1932-1934. So, Conquest’s estimates are spotty and incomplete.

I did a comprehensive overview of available estimates, including those by Conquest, and wrote a book, Lethal Politics, on Soviet democide to provide understanding and context for my figures. I calculate that the Communist regime, 1917-1987, murdered about 62,000,000 people, around 55,000,000 of them citizens (see Table 1.1 for a periodization of the deaths).

As for Stalin, when the holes in Conquest’s estimates are filled in, I calculate that Stalin murdered about 43,000,000 citizens and foreigners, over twice Conquest’s total. Therefore, the usual estimate of 20 million killed in Soviet democide is far off for the Soviet Union per se, and even less than half of the total Stalin alone murdered.

 

[jlprk]

The old man knew the value of a yuan but his dreamer grandson Kublai needed to start at the bottom.

(I've been reading the KFC thread.)

 

[Denny Crane]

http://www.ibtimes.com/how-many-people-did-joseph-stalin-kill-1111789

In February 1989, two years before the fall of the Soviet Union, a research paper by Georgian historian Roy Aleksandrovich Medvedev published in the weekly tabloid Argumenti i Fakti estimated that the death toll directly attributable to Stalin’s rule amounted to some 20 million lives (on top of the estimated 20 million Soviet troops and civilians who perished in the Second World War), for a total tally of 40 million.

''It's important that they published it, although the numbers themselves are horrible,'' Medvedev told the New York Times at the time.

''Those numbers include my father.''

Medevedev's grim bookkeeping included the following tragic episodes: 1 million imprisoned or exiled between 1927 to 1929; 9 to 11 million peasants forced off their lands and another 2 to 3 million peasants arrested or exiled in the mass collectivization program; 6 to 7 million killed by an artificial famine in 1932-1934; 1 million exiled from Moscow and Leningrad in 1935; 1 million executed during the ''Great Terror'' of 1937-1938; 4 to 6 million dispatched to forced labor camps; 10 to 12 million people forcibly relocated during World War II; and at least 1 million arrested for various “political crimes” from 1946 to 1953.

Although not everyone who was swept up in the aforementioned events died from unnatural causes, Medvedev’s 20 million non-combatant deaths estimate is likely a conservative guess.

Indeed, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, the literary giant who wrote harrowingly about the Soviet gulag system, claimed the true number of Stalin’s victims might have been as high as 60 million.

Most other estimates from reputed scholars and historians tend to range from between 20 and 60 million.

...

In any case, if the figure of 60 million dead is accurate that would mean that an average of 2 million were killed during each year of Stalin’s horrific reign – or 40,000 every week (even during “peacetime”).

If the lower estimate of 20 million is the true number, that still translates into 1,830 deaths every single day.

Thus, Stalin’s regime represented a machinery of killing that history – excluding, perhaps, China under Chairman Mao Tse-Tung -- has never witnessed.

My note, jlprk's hero is responsible for 40,000 government caused deaths/murders a week for Stalin's entire reign. Compare to the death penalty in the USA, which has been exercised, in total, maybe 4,000 times since the 1930s.

 

[jlprk]

Only 43 million? That's nothing. My calculator says 86 million.

My calculator says that there were 88 million American Indians. Since there are now 1 million, white people killed 87 million of them.

Beat 'cha.

 

[jlprk]

Okay, so now it's 60 million? Already got it covered. You'll have to find a link to over 87 million. You'll find it.