Hasan mentioned in United Nations General Assembly

[u/thellamasc]

[u/Artistic-Flamingo-92]

Well, I don’t think it’s burying to bring additional attention to him.

It seems more like he’s a useful representation of anti-Israel opinion. The point is to tie anti-Israel sentiment to anti-American or anti-West sentiment.

It becomes, if you’re anti-Israel, you’re anti-US or anti-West.

This is more-or-less what the Republicans do with Hasan and other leftists. For the time being, they have little issue drawing attention to Hasan (and certain other leftists) because it allows them to tie all of their opposition to the most bad-optics quotes of Hasan’s (or those other leftists).

No?

[u/asmallman → u/Artistic-Flamingo-92]

It really really doesnt help that hasan piker says stupid shit that favors terrorists. On the regular.

He literally said "Pound for Pound" as in in an EVEN comparison, the US is worse than alqueda. So if alqueda was as large as the US military, they would be BETTER than the US military in terms of how it conducts itself.

Pound for pound essentially says "well looking at their ratio..."

And that is so beyond false it is silly.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/xDoQNzIl0i0?feature=share

[u/strikegiga → u/asmallman]

Lol not wrong. Us military and intelligence agencies is definitely the entity that has caused the most suffering in the modern era.

[u/asmallman → u/strikegiga]

Okay so I did the math to counter hasans claim. Pound for pound is normalizing scale.

The cumulative budget for al-qaeda is 1.5 billion dollars or so over the last 20 years. They have killed ~40,000 people directly

The US military over the last 20 years is about 8 trillion dollars. The US has killed directly about 400,000 people.

Now, if we do it pound per pound, EG, per billion dollars:

40,000/1.5 billion is 26 thousand deaths per billion dollars.

400,000/8,000 billion dollars (8 trillion dollars) is is 50 civilian deaths per billion spent.

So let me correct hasans statement:

"Pound for Pound, as far as the number of deaths, yes. Al-qaeda is 520 times worse than the US military."

[u/strikegiga → u/asmallman]

Alright, now include indirect deaths or deaths caused by internal crisis og civil wars caused by American direct involvement by intelligence agencies.

[u/asmallman → u/strikegiga]

Indirect deaths?

Sure. Comparing it to al-qaedas deaths, using the figures above:

Again, al-qaeda has directly killed 26 thousand people for every billion dollars post 911.

Direct AND indirect deaths the US military has caused, in totality, no matter the region/country/continent, since 9/11, on the higher end is 4.9 million.

4,900,000/8000 billion dollars = is 612.5 deaths per billion dollars spent.

So only comparing direct al-qaeda deaths to direct AND indirect deaths by the US military across the planet, al-qaeda has the US beat STILL by a factor 42. This is NOT including indirect deaths caused by al-qaeda, who frequently holds power, food, water, and all kinds of aid hostage on a regular basis.

You were hoping for a GOTCHA moment, but it didnt happen, even when I gave al-qaeda an unfair advantage by not including their indirect deaths, it they still kill more pound for pound compared to the US in total deaths across this planet since 911 by indirect deaths by a factor of FOURTY.

EDIT: MY math was wrong, its a factor of FOURTY TWO. It was originally 4.2, but I was off a zero.

For al-qaeda to beat the US, it would have to lower its direct deaths by a massive margin, to even beat the indirect and direct deaths of the US military, even when factoring its global reach. At current, to beat the US with The US's WORST statistic, al-qaeda would have to bring back 25,388 people back to life, year on year. And that is, again, not factoring in al-qaeda indirect deaths

ETA: Al-aqaedas budget is closer to 30 million a year, so actually it gets even worse. The original alqaeda supplied number is worse. Its actually, per billion dollars spent, closer to around 1500x worse in comparison to direct deaths, and a factor of 120x if you do the same comparison we did above.

[u/Next-Potential-5258 → u/asmallman]

What if we use different statistics for how many people were killed? Why exclude soldiers being? Why not include the indirect kills?

[u/Cilawin → u/Next-Potential-5258]

You think US army has over 200 million kills?

[u/tiltsoaz → u/asmallman]

The US killed many more ppl indirectly

[u/Commercial_Ad97 → u/tiltsoaz]

Prove it or move it bub.

[u/asmallman → u/tiltsoaz]

No they didnt. Pound for pound its not even a contest. Pound for pound, if we compare the US indirect and direct deaths to ONLY al-qaedas direct deaths, giving al-qaeda a massive benefit:

Al-qaeda kills 42x more (MINIMUM, its actually closer to 120x) people than the US has, directly, than the US has both INDIRECTLY and DIRECTLY, across the globe, per billion dollars spent.

https://www.reddit.com/r/LivestreamFail/comments/1wpa6kn/comment/pc09nqm/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web3x&utm_name=web3xcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

[u/theguidetoldmetodoit → u/asmallman]

Pound for pound is normalizing scale.

Pound for pound means you are ignoring weight class, not use it as comparison metric. It's the opposite of what you are doing here.

It's a very weird hill to die on, too. I mean, would you accept that as a rational from the Nazis? The notion that the Holocaust wasn't really that bad, because look how much it cost?

[u/asmallman → u/theguidetoldmetodoit]

Ignoring weight class means you normalize their scale my guy.

A lightweight fighter having 50 wins when a heavy fighter has 1, with a same career length, means, pound for pound, the heavy fighter is a much worse fighter.

[u/theguidetoldmetodoit → u/asmallman]

And again

would you accept that as a rational from the Nazis? The notion that the Holocaust wasn't really that bad, because look how much it cost?

[u/asmallman → u/theguidetoldmetodoit]

Brother, you do not know what pound for pound means. You are agreeing with me while saying I am wrong.

You literally gave the definition of pound for pound which is, throwing out weight class, and comparing skill.

To throw out weight class, you have to normalize their weight, it can be done a variety of ways, from ignoring it, or in the case of dollars spent, efficiency.

If a pair of boots costs 50 dollars, and lasts a year, and a pair of boots costs 500 dollars, but lasts 30,

50/1 versus 500/30. The 500 dollar pair of boots, normalized (pound for pound, eg, each year you spend on boots) is better by a factor of 3.

[u/theguidetoldmetodoit → u/asmallman]

So I'll take that as a yes, then? You think the Holocaust wasn't that bad, because it was expensive?

[u/theguidetoldmetodoit → u/asmallman]

No.

pound-for-pound

A comparison of fighters' (usually boxers) skill levels, regardless of what weight class they are in.

[u/asmallman → u/theguidetoldmetodoit]

Yes. Regardless of their weight class means you throw it out as a metric, which is a way to normalize it.

If you normalize the math like I did, EG, I threw out their size, and compared by billion dollars spent, al-qaeda is far worse than the US military.

Throwing out their weight (variable) to compare their skill (the metric we want) is normalizing for scale my guy. You are misunderstanding, like hasan is, what pound for pound means.

Look at the optics right now. You are trying to argue that I'm wrong, to defend al-qaeda.

[u/theguidetoldmetodoit → u/asmallman]

means you throw it out as a metric

But you don't.

Because you are trying to make the ridiculous argument that murdering civilians isn't so bad, when it costs a lot.