Zafran
IB Expert
- Messages
- 2,737
- Reaction score
- 276
- Gender
- Male
- Religion
- Islam
100,000 people is very little compared to wars of the past. Barely a blip on the radar.
When Muslims rebelled in China in the 1800's the death toll was near 1,000,000 (Panthay Rebellion)
In the Iran-Irag war the death toll was over 1,000,0000 (1980's)
Other wars where the death toll was in the millions:
Vietnam War
Crusades
Thirty Years War
American Civil War
Russian Civil War
WWI
WWII
and the list goes on and on and on, with the World Wars having a death toll over 100x as much as Afghanistan and Iraq together.
So yes, in comparison they are skirmishes and not signs of the end of times.
so for you a war has to have a 1 million death toll to actaully be called a war or a sign of the end of times? so a death of 100,000 is so small that it should be called a skirmish?
how do you know that the world wont end - does the death toll have to go up to 1 million?
As for nukes they have been around for over 60 years now and still no end of times.
they can easily be used tommorrow - but this trumps all periods in histroy - did any other time in history have this much destructive power to destroy the world 7 times over (some say more)? the answer to that is clearly no -
Ultimatley what your saying is that it didnt happen in the past so it wont happen in the future? thats absurd. It could easily happen in the future. Especially with the destructive power we hold today - it only takes a button. It far more likely - in the past they were killing million becasue they didnt have power to destroy the entire world.
Last edited: