In the Second World War, Russia lost more people than any other nation — 20 million Russians were killed. Is it any wonder that Russia held on to Eastern Europe as a bunch of vassal states for so long after the war ended? They’d lost too many people not to hang on to their newly won Empire. Their unfortunate Kill Ratio demanded a stranglehold on Eastern Europe. Twenty-million dead Russians told them to take revenge.
As for the First World War, why did the English and the French insist on such a punitive peace with Germany? That old Kill Ratio – they never got a chance to kill enough Germans to make up for their anger at being killed themselves.
The disease of Kill Ratioitis operates on an extremely atavistic tribal-memory level. Why did it take the American South so long to get over the Civil War? Too many Southerners died, and they never got a chance to kill the Northerners back and equalize the Kill Ratio.
Not that Kill Ratio is always a bad thing. One man in recent history used an imagined Kill Ratio to promote something good. He was President De Klerk of South Africa (Nelson Mandela’s co-winner of the Nobel Peace Prize for freeing South Africa from apartheid). Some months before De Klerk stopped the ban on the ANC and released Mandela, he made a remarkable speech to a group of South African policemen, who were at that time the stormtroopers of apartheid. De Klerk told them that the whites could easily keep apartheid going by shooting a couple of hundred or thousand black protesters every few years. But, he asked, how many blacks would the whites eventually have to shoot every year? Hundreds of thousands? De Klerk decided that the future Kill Ratio wasn’t worth the present status quo. The numbers simply didn’t bear contemplation. Too many A’s on the other side would have to be killed. So he decided to legalize the ANC and release Nelson Mandela.
History being what it is, there is never a fair and equivalent Kill Ratio – a stable A for an A. One side always kills more of the other, and usually much more. For the A you kill, I’m going to kill A plus of you. The only equivalent Kill Ratio ever imagined is the perfect AA Kill Ratio of a nuclear war — Mutual Assured Destruction, in which everybody gets killed.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - SFC SKI
Shouldn't this bve posted under "Satire"?
2 - K D
"we invaded Iraq, where we’ve whacked maybe 30,000 civilians (some say over 100,000)"
So the standard is higher for the U.S.? If someone kills civilians because they don't like the U.S. hanging out in Iraq those get counted as U.S. kills? Every other nation and figure you mentioned was where a country kills with their own bombs or by the hands of their own army but with the U.S. we don't even have to kill to get thrown under the rug as killing 30 - 100k civilians we just have to be the reason some extremist from some Arab country kills an Iraqi. Let the terrorists get credit for their own kills.
3 - Victor Plenty
Just like most other breathtakingly misguided oversimplifications of history, this was not intended as satire, so there is no need to label it as such.
4 - Rob
I know a point was trying to be made in the first couple paragraphs, however, I am a Jew and I know a survivor, but not anyone killed in the Holocaust.
5 - jack e. jett
bush is drinking again.
isreal is killing innocent children in the name of god.
christian women in the usa are killing their children because god told them to.
iraqi children are loosing parents because people with small penisis create wars.
a backlash against isreal is coming up.
the world is going to shit.
thank god for me
jack jett
6 - Alix
Jack, it is amazing that their are people as stupid as you in this world. Israel were the ones who have conceded land to the Palestine over the past 10 years and are still being attacked. Remember it was Hezbulah that crossed the line, killed Isralis and captured soldiers. Israel has every right to do what their doing and then some.
7 - Jamie Stern-Weiner
"Jack, it is amazing that their are people as stupid as you in this world. Israel were the ones who have conceded land to the Palestine over the past 10 years and are still being attacked."
Erm...if by 'conceded land' you mean 'stopped occupying Palestinian land', then yes. Even though, in the West Bank, the settlements have continued to expand.
8 - Alix
Jamie, I noticed you are unable to defend the un-provoked capturing and killing of the soldiers. Once again, Israel has every right to do what there doing.
9 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Where are you anyway, Jamie. England? I know that Israel was once home to you and you visit it from time to time (when the Arabs aren't attacking us) but can't you defend you own people at least? Is it too much to ask that a Jew stand up for his own? If you had been in the Warsaw ghetto, or in Lodz, would you have been justifying the actions of the Nazis and criticizing us for "provocations?"
I'm sorry Adam, this guy Jamie upsets me far more than Hamas or Nasrallah. They are clear and honest. They want to kill us and let us know very clearly and in a hundred diffrent ways.
Jamie is one of the Tribe. But he condemns us from the safety of Europe and suffers none of the risks of trying to survive the violence and terror of the people he so ardently defends. At least Uri Avneri lives here. So a terrorist's bomb can rip him to shreds as easily as it can me.
10 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Now, Adam, let's get to your article.
You were making far more sense when you observed that Jews have had to contemplate their own extermination. Your A-A theory for killing - better labeled A-A' - is interesting and may even make sense, but I find it a bit hard to swallow.
Just a minor point. When you have to contemplate your own extermination, it is easier (not more moral, just easier) to contemplate someone else's. So, for example that dam in southern Egypt used to control the flow of the Nile, if destroyed, would kill off enough Egyptians (around 50 million) to satisfy Jews in terms of the numbers using your theory. But it still wouldn't do the job - not because of bloodlust - but because of the strategic factors involved. The enemy is all around, not just in Egypt.
11 - Martin Lav
Good theory Adam. Take the Japanese in WWII for example, I think the ratio there was about 22:1
Germany counting the fire bombing of Dresden...not sure exactly, but you may have a good twist on this....War after all is a numbers game isn't it. We keep score for ever more. Problem is these numbers have children, are children, have husbands/wives, sisters/brothers.
What a world huh?
We can blog away with satire arguing who's right or who's wrong and more numbers die. Leaving more grieving numbers. The numbers on the one evil side started because they captured 2 in Israel, so we have to kill 240, because we have 6 million to remember. I don't know about you, but the Guy I follow says that do unto 1 as you would have 1 do unto you and 1 minus 1 does not equal 2.
12 - Matthew
LEBANESE HOLOCAUST
What have the chosen people been chosen to do?
Over-react is the new Jewish term for murder, thanks for the update.
13 - Peter J
Adam,
I may be wrong but weren't we already in Afghanistan for a while before 9/11?
And I think that we invaded Iraq because they were holding, in ready to use against us, Weapons of Mass Destruction.
As a matter of fact I don't believe to this day that we have actually punished one single Mother Fucker for destroying 2 of the tallest buildings in the world or attacking OUR PENTAGON which represents the STRENGTH of our United States and the murder of 3000+ of our citizens!
14 - rj
if the jews just wanted to kill bunches and bunches of arabs, they would. i mean, they've got the nukes. instead, they are launching a military campaign (in response to an overt casus belli by arabs) with the intention of minimizing civilian (arab) casualties.
15 - jack e. jett
alix
yes, thankfully there are people out there as stupid as me because we are the ones that are far too ignorant to be fearful to call a spade a spade....
jack jett
ignorant savant
16 - RJ Elliott
"isreal [sic] is killing innocent children in the name of god."
Is "killing innocent children" Israel's goal? No. But that IS Hezbollah's goal...
"iraqi children are loosing [sic] parents because people with small penisis [sic] create wars."
That's not even worth responding to...
"thank god for me"
There are a thousand good reasons to thank God. You ain't one of them...
17 - Islam Alewady
whats all that about theories and all my friend ...it needs no long speaches , whatever u say is only common sense , u just wasted 10 minutes of my time
18 - jack e. jett
oh mr. r.j.
then i must have misunderstood the news. i thought i had heard some children had been killled in syria and lebanon by the overreaction of isreal.
jack jett
19 - Diz
None of the people here bitching about Israel have proposed a single alternate solution to stopping hezbollah...just an observation.
20 - Adam Ash
The problem is not Hezbollah. The problem is Israelis and Palestinians like killing each other more than they like to negotiate with each other.
21 - Alix
When you give a pass and make excuses to Hezbolah, Syria and Iran you allow them to continue to kill. If a stand is not made by the UN, Israel and Lebanon then they will continue to kill. It may not be pretty, but someone needs to force Hez. out of Lebanon. Good for Israel.
22 - Martin Lav
Why is it that Bush won't say a Goddamn word about Israel our supposed ally, bombing the shit out of one of his fledging examples of democracy. Who is the actual world power here? Is this the tail wagging the dog? Why is that when the middle east is following the Bush doctrine of Democracy spreading that we can allow Israel to go in and undo the entire thing. To top it off, they apparently have declared war on Christianity judging by the amount of bombing they're doing to Lebanon.
23 - Alix
Once again Martin, you excuse Hezbolah. Why aren't you asking why is the nation not condeming Hezbolah and their actions. Why is this the fault of Israel. They were not the one to capture and kill first. That can not be forgotten. Bush can easily stand behind Israel and start a war, but you would be mad at him for that. The hypocracy is amazing.
24 - Martin Lav
I don't excuse Hezballah, but I didn't see the US going all willy nilly with a bombing campaign when our soldiers or citizens were kidnapped or beheaded by whatever Jihadists faction captured them. Bush is basically standing behind Israel and letting them do what he really wants, yet he is the one that promoted democracy to take place in Gaza and in Lebanon. Yet Israel didn't like the results and we followed their direction in not supporting the results. Bush will hope Israel cleans out Hezballah and then he'll ask them to stop bombing them. Israel has a right to defend itself, but where does defense stop and outright massacre of Christians stop? I thought Bush was a Christian?
25 - Alix
The reason Bush didn't go all willy nilly is because lefty liberals in Congress and the Senate and the media attack him for being strong with terrorists Israel doesn't care what libersl think about them. They believe in defending themselves at all costs.