https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banu_Qurayza

Looks like you didn't even read your own linked article. Provide better evidence please.

SVY, yes as usual PE sends random links without reading them... And he thinks his position will be taken seriously tsssh.

Major yes many of them were expelled (hundred of thousands alongside Jews), but a majority of them were forcibly converted or slaughtered.

"If it weren't for us you'd be speaking german now"

Untrue, I doubt the UK would even be invaded by Germany. The URSS contributed more then the US for the victory against Germany.

At it's peak, at it's peak, the western front had arround 150 german divisions, while the Eastern front had more then 450 for the same period. Without the Eastern front and the Red army holding 3 fourths of the german army, the D-day would have miserably failed.

You americans think you've saved the world twice in world wars, when it's pretty much not true. History brainwash I guess.

Edited 3/30/2016 18:52:50

You americans think you've saved the world twice in world wars,

It is particularly false for World War I, Americans came very late, there is even a joke about it in Europe:
- How do you get Americans to join a World War?
- Tell them it's nearly finished.

Normally I like discussing stuff to hear different opinions but when it comes to TeamGuns ignoring common facts in each and every of his posts then stuff gets to boring for me.

What common facts Norman? List them, I hear you. I'm always open to discuss anything.

Without America, Britain would have been much worse off, but a German invasion is improbable.

I believe the best contribution america did on the war was the supply it provided rather then the strict military help. The industrial capacity provided by the US was just insane.

Edited 3/30/2016 19:40:24

he just said god also that crazy right winger wants $15 minimum wage

Yeah, so what? He's a Christian terrorist. Does the bible say anything about a minimum wage?

Norman, most of TeamGuns' posts actually make sense. It's TeamGuns and Koala, on a serious political level (forget any of my nationalistic trolling), that I agree with the most.

What common facts Norman? List them, I hear you. I'm always open to discuss anything.

No you aren't, this is to boring for me. In fact you even quoted the same bible passage that I explained to you a day earlier and which doesn't substantiate your claim at all about Christianity being violent. When there will be a similar discussion a year later (or apparently a day later...) you will just keep using the same quote unwilling to learn anyting.

I already explained also in another thread at length (though not you) why violence in the name of Christianity makes no sense. When I say "makes no sense" I mean that it's not about weighing "violent passages" vs "non violent passages" against each other but that the mere concept of violence in the name of Christianity doesn't exist in the bible. The key point is that the hope of Christianity is in heaven and not on this earth. Also unlike the god of ISIS who isn't mighty enough (or doesn't want) to save them from American or Russian bombers when Jesus comes again he will trample his enemies all by himself.

Edited 3/30/2016 20:21:03

I just love that quote, it's stronger then me, I can't stop using it. I understand your interpretation of it, but I use it as a way to say that the bible is just as akin to be misinterpreted as the Quran. There's other violent quotes on it other then that one anyway.


I have to say that I don't believe in Jesus or miracles, but I guess you've already guessed that. The Quran says that suicide is a huge offense to Allah, you can't go to heaven if you kill yourself, thus violence in the name of Islam don't make much sense either.

I'm not an atheist though, but my vision of god is very different then the one offered by the book.

Edited 3/30/2016 20:25:53

The USSR couldn't do shit without US supplies. And while they did a lot, Britain was fucked without the US

Don't just believe everything an American textbook says. American and British supplies were of the worst quality, they were few, and most didn't even arrive until after Moskva battle. 45% of the total equipment given was given after 1942.

Britain was far from falling either (though this can be more attributed to American loans and brutal colonial policies valuing supplies to Britain over supplies to the native folk - I think most estimates have it as 2 million Indians killed from manmade hunger during the Second World War).

Advisor to Franklin Roosevelt, H. Hopkins: "I had never believed that our Lend Lease help had been the chief factor in the Soviet defeat of Hitler on the eastern front. That this had been done by the heroism and blood of the Russian Army."

Some stats (for 1941 to 1945 unless otherwise said):

Soviet small arms made: 29.1 million
Given to Russia from America and Britain: 152k

Soviet artillery systems made: 648k
Given to Russia from America and Britain: 9,400

Soviet tanks and other military land automobiles made: 133,000
Given to Russia from America and Britain: 12,000

Soviet military aircraft made: 141,000
Given to Russia from America and Britain: 18,300

Soviet flying fuel made: 6989k tonnes
Given to Russia from America and Britain: 2586k tonnes

30% Henry Ford's tyres were shipped to Germany 1939to1945 (as H. Ford was a known anti-Jew)

45% of American-British foreign equipment came after 1942 (and few during the most violent bits of Stalingrad).

Summer 1942, two convoys of supplies were sent to Russia. 21/72 ships even made it. No further convoys were sent until December.

Also, to say: these were just loans, paid back (by Russia, anyway) with interest and profit to America. In truth, America made great profit in the war selling to both sides.

How about I recruit you as a Russian patriot brainwashed who saved Europe 5 times?

Edited 3/30/2016 20:38:15

It is particularly false for World War I, Americans came very late

The war would have dragged on for a while. There was no guarantee of Allied victory with Russia gone.

The 100 Days' offence was Germany's last try against France and Britain, and it failed, before the first Americans even landed, if you really want more about the last days of the war (in which America was smally involved in), a good documentary:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-nTvoZ_Cpxw&t=32s&list=PLhuA9d7RIOdaPM9tBwNA6nDF4yszMucl7&index=8

At any rate, there was no way the Axis powers were going to last for much longer.

Edited 3/30/2016 23:42:01

^ I wish I could understand Russian, this documentary seemed to be a good one.

I also recently watched "Apocalypse: First World War", a French documentary and the best so far I ever seen, with enhanced true images and movies with colors and sound.

Here's a link of the documentary in English version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xO8uhme0o3Y

Comparing Islam to Christianity is a dead end. Both are religions that could (and are) be interpreted in many different ways. In Christianity, we got the saints and all other people who did good (not going to name any since admittedly, my history of theology needs working on) on one side and the Crusaders on the other one. Both were following the path of Christianity... yet it wasn't the same path, as you can probably guess.

Same applies to Islam. I've heard stories about pious, Islamic people helping out everyone, not only their brothers-in-faith and I'm sure that it can be confirmed if you browse the internet a bit. And then, obviously, the ISIS and terrorists, the mujahideen and Osama bin Laden, whatever else you want. But, believe it or not, most islamic people actually disagree with their actions and think they're derailing Islam.

Christianity and Islam are both sides of the same coin. There isn't that much of a difference between them. What matters is how they are implemented, which depends on the people, not the religion itself.

ignore death, hes dead anyway