Genghis and Hitler

war is a natural part of humanity, targeted genocide agaisnt specific people for no reason is not....

Chinggis made war like any leader does, for land, power, and wealth, Hitler did even when not at war killed people because of who they where, thats a big difference.

1. Mongol Conquests (13th Century)
   • Colin McEvedy, Atlas of World Population History (1978):
     • China Proper: In the text, he states that the population declined by 35 million as the Mongols reduced the country to subjugation during the 13th Century. In the Chart, the population drops from 115M to 85M between 1200 and 1300 CE.
     • Iran: Charted population declined from 5.0M to 3.5M
     • Afghanistan: from 2.50M to 1.75M
     • Russia-in-Europe: 7.5M to 7M
   • Alan McFarlane, The Savage Wars of Peace: England, Japan and the Malthusian Trap (2003): Chinese population reduced to half in 50 years -- over 60 million people dying or failing to be replaced.
   • Washington Post, 4/4/4 review of Jack Weatherford's Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World: "It's estimated that 15 million died in the Mongols' five-year invasion of central Asia."
   • The (London) Independent (18 Aug. 2001): >3M died during the creation of Genghis's empire.
   • PGtH:
     • 1.6M killed in Herat
     • 160,000 of the Shah's troops killed at Bokhara
   • Gibbon D&F3,6
     • Zingis [Genghis]: conquest of Central Asia: 4,347,000 in 3 cities
       • Maru: 1,300,000
       • Herat: 1,600,000
       • Neisabour [Nishapur]: 1,747,000
     • Zingis: 160,000 Carizmians [Khwarizmi]
     • Baghdad: pyramid of 90,000 skulls
     • Cublai
       • 100,000 Chinese commit mass suicide to escape
       • 100,000 lost in expedition v. Japan
   • R.J. Rummel accuses the Mongols of 29,927,000 democides in the 13th through 15th Centuries.
   • Britannica 11th ed. (1911)
     • Jenghiz Khan
       • Herat: 1.6M
       • Battle against Khwarizm: 160,000 Khw. k.

From Wikipedia:

1200, Northern China - 30,000,000 killed

1215, Yanjing China (today Beijing) - 25,000,000 killed

1221, Nishapur, Persia - ~1.7 million killed in assault

1221, Merv, Persia - ~1.3 million killed in assault

1221, Meru Chahjan, Persia - ~1.3 million killed in assault

1221, Rayy, Persia - ~1.6 million killed in assault

1226, Tangut Campaign - Gengis Khan launches war against the northern China people of Tangut.

1236, Bil�r,Bulgar cities, Volga Bulgaria - 150,000 or more and more (nearly half of population)

1237-1240, Kievan Rus' - half of population

1241, Wahlstatt -- defeat of a combined Polish-German force in lower Silesia (Poland); the Mongols turn back to attend to the election of a new Grand Khan.

1258, Baghdad - ~800,000 people. Results in destruction of Abbasid dynasty

1226-1266, ~18 million reported killed in conquest of northern Chinese territory. This number estimated by Kublai Khan himself.

About 80 million killed in total over mongol reign.

Not sure how correct these number are but even if a fraction of that is correct that would put Mongols conquerers in a unique group. Hitler, Alexander, or Arabs didn't go this far

On the positive side Mongols pretty much adapted the culture of Persian in the west and Chinese in the east and spread both cultures around the world. Then again they may not have had any alternatives

Hitler is considered evil because of the concentration camps. He killed people because of their ethnic group. Genghis had mass killings only in battle and for strategical reasons (fear and psychological warfare), not because he didnt like the people.

I find it of extremely bad tast, cynical, silly, childish, immature and a host of other similar characterizations (enter whatever you wish, no matter how harsh, I'll subscribe to it) to justify mass genocide and horrendous acts of mass brutality, by simply stating silly things like "yes, but those times were different" or "sure he killed many, but that was normal back then" or other similar bull.

Genghis is considered the greatest mass murderer of all times, he devastated an entire continent and halted the progress for the whole Asia, and you dare to compare him with people like Charlamagne, Alexander, J. Ceasar or any other for that account? All the conquerors of all times haven't done half of what the Mongols did alone.

We've lost any sense of reason here, haven't we?

How would the Ghenghiz admirers (even those named after him - we've got two resident Khan-nettes, huh?) feel if it was their mothers raped and then slaughtered, their fathers butchered, their brothers and sisters massacred? How would they feel if it was their homes torn down, their crops burned, their land ravaged?

Would you still feel that Ghenghiz was nothing more than "a great conqueror" and such similar crap?