Knifeman screams 'this is for Syria' in London tube machete attack - Polidicks

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260121]the siege of fort pitt, british troops gave blankets (among other things) from their hospitals as gifts to the indigenous population in hope that it would spread and kill them off[/QUOTE] any others besides a single isolated incident of a siege of a small fort? there's also mentioning that there's serious doubts with the blankets being unable to spread smallpox germs to the point they would cause an outbreak like, nobody actually knows if it even worked

Trail of Tears

[QUOTE=FlashMarsh;49260818]Trail of Tears[/QUOTE] how was disease weaponized on the trail of tears?

I was just giving another example of genocide of the Native Indians

[QUOTE=RAG Frag;49258378][media]http://youtu.be/6_dfT_8Smy4[/media] Got the same video but in youtube/media tag form OP[/QUOTE] "You ain't no Muslim, bruv!"

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260866]this argument has gone on long enough, biological warfare has been around since at least the 14th century, it is irrelevant to the topic and doesn't need a discussion around it, the fact of the matter is that people from the old world knew that the new world would be more susceptible to their diseases and tried to weaponize that lack of immunity[/QUOTE] Offtopic, but were there no deadly diseases that would ravage the colonists population? That has always confused me. Smallpox seems to have decimated pretty much all the natives of the Americas, but there was no similar disease destroying the invaders.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260902]cgp grey started a video series about it recently, all evidence points to it being because europeans lived in densely packed areas with diseases and animals everywhere, whereas native americans tended to be more isolated and didn't have that many herding animals to get diseases from[/QUOTE] Even Syphilis, which was theorized for a long time to have come from the Americas, is starting to have evidence pointing to that it was native to Europe.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260866]the fact of the matter is that people from the old world knew that the new world would be more susceptible to their diseases and tried to weaponize that lack of immunity[/QUOTE] no they didn't, and in the few isolated attempts that they tried to it's dubious as to if it even worked there's also mentioning that diseases like smallpox killed europeans in heaps all the time too, so it seems counterproductive to spread it deliberately when it can just as easily backfire also since they didn't understand germ theory there was virtually no way for them to isolate the disease, keep it alive, and then spread it effectively. [QUOTE=bdd458;49260910]Even Syphilis, which was theorized for a long time to have come from the Americas, is starting to have evidence pointing to that it was native to Europe.[/QUOTE] it came from the new world, there is indisputable evidence for this also the fact that it suddenly appeared in the 1490s and nobody had seen it before and it was exceptionally deadly before mutating into a less deadly form implies very strongly it was a new pathogen that suddenly appeared in europe

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260936]if smallpox had been just as effective against both sides, why did the native americans lose half a million whilst the british casualties never came close?[/QUOTE] I'm not really sure what the %s are, but it would be worthwhile to attempt to compare the percentages of deaths between Natives and Colonists, and by year/decade - not necessarily the raw number of dead.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260936]if smallpox had been just as effective against both sides, why did the native americans lose half a million whilst the british casualties never came close?[/QUOTE] where are you getting these numbers? the thing about smallpox btw is that treatment and prevention is just as important. once the first few waves ended in mexico, the natives very quickly began to develop these for it (taking care of the victim, quarantine, etc). when the first outbreaks happened people more or less fled their homes and allowed the infected to die, when with even a modicum of treatment survival rates increase drastically. also there's mentioning that europeans who caught smallpox had a 30% chance of dying, even with the addition of their natural immunities

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260936]if smallpox had been just as effective against both sides, why did the native americans lose half a million whilst the british casualties never came close?[/QUOTE] A large portion of the initial contact outbreaks (also known as "Virgin Soil Epidemics") were entirely unintentional and not directed towards genocide in any way.

[QUOTE=Sobotnik;49260801]any others besides a single isolated incident of a siege of a small fort? there's also mentioning that there's serious doubts with the blankets being unable to spread smallpox germs to the point they would cause an outbreak like, nobody actually knows if it even worked[/QUOTE] If smallpox can be transmitted in pretty much anyway, rubbing a blanket and popping infected blisters and pus all over them, and having someone then use it would be a pretty sure way. Especially since clothes can actually spread it. Im sure it works, but to the historical exaggerations a lot of people were taught, probably not.

[QUOTE=HoodedSniper;49261201]If smallpox can be transmitted in pretty much anyway, rubbing a blanket and popping infected blisters and pus all over them, and having someone then use it would be a pretty sure way. Especially since clothes can actually spread it. Im sure it works, but to the historical exaggerations a lot of people were taught, probably not.[/QUOTE] It could probably work, but not very well. There's also mentioning that the pus or whatever there was on the blankets would have a weakened or dead form of the smallpox virus too, which makes infection even less likely (and those that would get infected would be much more likely to survive).

[QUOTE=RichyZ;49260121]the siege of fort pitt, british troops gave blankets (among other things) from their hospitals as gifts to the indigenous population in hope that it would spread and kill them off[/QUOTE] Unconfirmed. Mind you, Europeans were shitting in their drinking water until the 1850s-60s. If anything its acts of mercy being warped into something awful by ignrance.

Yes, Europeans tried using smallpox as a weapon in a few isolated incidents, but to argue that played even a nominal role in the mass number of Indians killed by disease is silly at best, and disingenuous at worst.

[QUOTE=dunkace;49253967]You cant. Or its near impossible. You would have to start coming out with and carrying out some of the shit Trump says.[/QUOTE] Yeah man, fuck Trump's crazy shit like screening the fucking people you let in to your country so shit like this doesn't happen and can be prevented. Epicly memed my friend.

[QUOTE=Valiantttt;49254682] Best thing to do in a situation like this? Run and call the fucking police, let them do their jobs. [/QUOTE] Ok sure, self-defense should probably be a last resort in many situations. [QUOTE=Valiantttt;49254682][U]If you can't run, you likely had no chance of defending yourself anyway.[/U][/QUOTE] Woah… that’s just morbid. Do most people in your country look at victims of violent crime this way? If someone tries to run and gets cornered by a violent aggressor, they should not have any legal right to defend themselves? I mean a lot of posts I’m seeing from UK users seem to imply that just the concept of self-defense is highly frowned upon in any shape or form; even if no weapons are involved. And by “highly frowned upon” I mean it sounds like the courts will try to fucking nail you to a cross if you try to defend yourself from an attacker even if it was justified, and that society will outright ostracize you for using [I]any[/I] form of violence to survive an attack.

[QUOTE=3bwii;49264759]Yeah man, fuck Trump's crazy shit like screening the fucking people you let in to your country so shit like this doesn't happen and can be prevented. Epicly memed my friend.[/QUOTE] Yeah when his proposed 'screening' process is a flat ban on the world's second largest religious group then maybe a few alarm bells should be ringing on whether that's sane on any level. Bad People don't come in one convenient colour so you can easily sort them from the Good People.

[QUOTE=3bwii;49264759]Yeah man, fuck Trump's crazy shit like screening the fucking people you let in to your country so shit like this doesn't happen and can be prevented. Epicly memed my friend.[/QUOTE] [url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1496554]"Screening"...[/url]

[QUOTE=3bwii;49264759]Yeah man, fuck Trump's crazy shit like screening the fucking people you let in to your country so shit like this doesn't happen and can be prevented. Epicly memed my friend.[/QUOTE] Sorry not sorry, I don't think you have the right to even have a [i]word[/i] on the matter when you don't hear the fanatical dogshit domma spewed by Trump on FOX News every god damn morning. You know, the stuff that's got America so paranoid and has us constantly sent to war after we spent so much time getting out of the middle east. You may think you have a good grasp on what it's like knowing that people want Hitler in office, but I can tell you now, you don't have a minute clue.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;49269504][url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1496554]"Screening"...[/url][/QUOTE] That's a temporary ban on allowing people from Muslim countries to immigrate to America, which it not about refugees. And it's until they find a solution for stopping extremists from getting into the country. It's a safety measure, nothing to do with racism.

[QUOTE=Zero-Point;49269504][url=https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1496554]"Screening"...[/url][/QUOTE] Oddly enough Trump isn't pulling this out of nowhere. Other Republican nominees have proposed bans on muslims specifically from Iraq and Syria. However Trump simplified that.

[QUOTE=3bwii;49279187]That's a temporary ban on allowing people from Muslim countries to immigrate to America, which it not about refugees. And it's until they find a solution for stopping extremists from getting into the country. It's a safety measure, nothing to do with racism.[/QUOTE] A complete and entirely discriminatory ban, no matter how permanent, isn't "screening", was my point.