What is the greatest atrocity that has ever been Commited?

[classical_hero]

Here are the options.
The Holocaust.
The Crusades.
The Modern Islamic Jihad.
The Yugoslavian Massacres.
The many African Massacres.
The Crucifixion of Christ.
Other.
Don't Care/Radioactive Monkey.
These are the only ones I could think of at the Moment. If you can think of any, please list them

 

[WS78]

The killing of one man by another.

 

[classical_hero]

For me the choice was between the Holocaust and Crusades. I choose the Crusades because the effects of them are still being felt now and also many people were murdered for not believing the Offical "Church" doctrine. I believe that the Holocaust was an indirect action of the Crusades. I believe this because the goals of each are almost the same.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Either Collectivization, the Great Leap Forward, or the Cultural Revolution.

 

[Inhalaattori]

1. Inventing of so called "book religions" (judaeo-christian religions, Islam included) = "Atrocity of mind"
2. Destroying of native American cultures.
3. Killing of 20.000.000 soviet citizens by Stalin

Hmm. None of them is in your list.

The Crucifixion of Christ.

 

[CruddyLeper]

Without a doubt, the genocide of the Native Americans.

 

[Vilati Timmadar]

For me the choice was between the Holocaust and Crusades. I choose the Crusades because the effects of them are still being felt now and also many people were murdered for not believing the Offical "Church" doctrine. I believe that the Holocaust was an indirect action of the Crusades. I believe this because the goals of each are almost the same.

The Crusades are used as a reason for the jihad. Compared to the slaughter of muslim troops in the 7th century in Persia, Northern Africa, Spain, Southern France and the byzantine border - and again in the 11th century after the battle of Mantzikert in what is today Turkey - and again in 1453 when they conquered constantinopel and - and - and...
...the Crusades weren't worse than that.

The Holocaust and the Crusades are not linked. The Crusades were done because of economical reasons. Europe wanted a trade route to India which wasn't controlled of arabs. The byzantines lost palestine in 1071 and the pope called for crusaders in 1095. It's like someone rallied troops to help Nazi-Germany in 1969 - a little late..."religion" was just a nice way of gathering people from many nations.

The Holocaust happened because of pure racism. Hitler wanted to annihilate the jews while the pope wanted to control land.

 

[jack merchant]

Comparing atrocities is a completely pointless, and actually dangerous business, since the evilness or scale of any particular atrocity doesn't in the slightest excuse or diminish the evilness of another. Which is usually what you get in these debates: 'It was alright for Pinochet to murder 3,000 people and torture thousands more because Allende might have killed more'.

An atrocity is an atrocity, and we should condemn them all.

 

[Hitro]

Comparing atrocities is a completely pointless, and actually dangerous business, since the evilness or scale of any particular atrocity doesn't in the slightest excuse or diminish the evilness of another. Which is usually what you get in these debates: 'It was alright for Pinochet to murder 3,000 people and torture thousands more because Allende might have killed more'.

An atrocity is an atrocity, and we should condemn them all.

Very well said...

 

[classical_hero]

The Crusades are used as a reason for the jihad. Compared to the slaughter of muslim troops in the 7th century in Persia, Northern Africa, Spain, Southern France and the byzantine border - and again in the 11th century after the battle of Mantzikert in what is today Turkey - and again in 1453 when they conquered constantinopel and - and - and...
...the Crusades weren't worse than that.

The Crusades are using tactic that many Islamic based terriots groups. They used both used Children in their efforts. I believe this is a great Atrocity because you should never teach a Child to hate one group or the other.
On the choice of Crucifixion of Christ, I added that one because I am a Christian and believe that it was an Atrocity committed. You may not believe that, but I do, and since I orginated the poll, I can add any options I could.

 

[CruddyLeper]

An atrocity is an atrocity, and we should condemn them all.

Not so easy to do in the case of the Native peoples who got shafted... I mean, anyone can pay lip service, but that won't stop exactly the same things happening again.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Um, the Crucifiction is not an option in the poll, despit being mentioned as one in the OP.

 

[classical_hero]

Comparing atrocities is a completely pointless, and actually dangerous business, since the evilness or scale of any particular atrocity doesn't in the slightest excuse or diminish the evilness of another. Which is usually what you get in these debates: 'It was alright for Pinochet to murder 3,000 people and torture thousands more because Allende might have killed more'.

An atrocity is an atrocity, and we should condemn them all.

The question is about the greatest Atrocity. This is question that isn't the best wording. Maybe I could have said the worst. I used the word greatest as in it being the Atrocity that you believe has been the Atrocity that has had the greatest effect on humanity, that being bad. All the atrocities meantioned are bad, I was looking for the one you thought went down in Histroy as the greatest of the lot.

 

[Vilati Timmadar]

I believe this is a great Atrocity because you should never teach a Child to hate one group or the other.

Agreed. I didn't realize that you condemn this specific part of the crusades.

On the choice of Crucifixion of Christ, I added that one because I am a Christian and believe that it was an Atrocity committed. You may not believe that, but I do, and since I orginated the poll, I can add any options I could.

You weren't talking to me, were you?

 

[jack merchant]

The question is about the greatest Atrocity. This is question that isn't the best wording. Maybe I could have said the worst. .

I didn't object to the wording of the question, but rather to the usefulness of the whole exercise.

 

[luiz]

For me the choice was between the Holocaust and Crusades. I choose the Crusades because the effects of them are still being felt now and also many people were murdered for not believing the Offical "Church" doctrine. I believe that the Holocaust was an indirect action of the Crusades. I believe this because the goals of each are almost the same.

The Crusades are blamed for much then what they deserve.

There were plenty of attrocities committed by Crusader troops, I sure agree on that one. However the Crusades per se were nothing more then a response to muslim aggression of christian lands. Lets remember that muslim troops had occuppied large parts of the Christian Byzantine Empire, as well as the Iberian Peninsula, Southern France and Sicily. Many attrocities were commited by those muslim invaders, particularly in Sicily, where one ruler was known to rape a different virgin everyday.

Not to mention that the massacres were usually condemned by the Church. The commanders who ordered the attack on Constantinople, on the Fourth Crusade, were all expelled from the Church(and as such, according to Catholic tradition, condemned to Hell).

My point is that the Crusades are within the context of a barbaric time, and both sides are at least equally guilty. To say that the Holocauts is a consequence of the Crusades is nonsensical IMO.

 

[luiz]

As for the original question, the answer would either be the Holocaust, the Terror Famine, the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, and the "Reeducation" camps of Cambodja.

Those attrocities are so huge that there´s no way to compare them.

 

[The Last Conformist]

"The Terror Famine"?

 

[luiz]

"The Terror Famine"?

Yes, the Terror Famine

 

[nihilistic]

The killing of one man by another.

That could easily be topped by the killing of two by another, especially if the "one" is included in the "two".