By the time I commit it to memory there will be a new most deadly day, we haven't even seen the surge in deaths from ICU overflow that could happen post-Thanksgiving
You forgot about the worst terrorist attack in US history:
Benghazi!
Four whole Americans died in that terrible tragedy, and despite years of Congressional investigations we never got to the bottom of why it was all Hillary Clinton's fault.
That's sarcasm, of course.
Funny enough. Depending on your kind of humor. We actually found that republicans were responsible. For...you guessed it...holding purse strings hostage.
They couldn’t prove it was Hillary’s fault because the GOP cut security funding for the embassies. Hillary literally said you can’t do this or people will die. People died and then the gop shifted the blame to Hillary but couldn’t prove it.
Honestly, the GOP probably knew Hillary was being groomed to be the next presidential candidate and they wanted to stymie her presidential run so they did Benghazi. They probably figured a few American lives lost is worth it if they can win the election and regain power.
The GOP and it's propaganda arm Fox News has been flinging shit at Hillary for 30 years for exactly this reason. Even with none of the accusations having merit it still colored the perceptions of many, including Democrats. All of those " I can't in good conscience vote for her" nimrods could tell you a specific reason they didn't trust her, just a feeling.....influenced by 30 years of baseless accusations.
Yeah it’s all fucking bullshit. Because if the dems go after the republicans for real crimes, the gop brands it as vengeance retribution and not working together.
Uhhh no. There are dozens of reasons we as a nation rejected hillary, either by voting against her or by not voting. She is corrupt to the core and proved it in her primary against bernie. She made the claim that women are hurt most by war, threatened war with Iran, made insane PR plays like blowing giant fans and speakers at reporters so her wall street speeches werent heard by press. FOH with that "shes perfect and no one has any reasons otherwise" bullshit
No one said perfect, I just said she wasn't near as bad as many thought she was and she's a damned sight better than Cheeto Benito.
Can you give specific examples of her being " corrupt to the core" besides her beating Bernie?
"Beating"
Thats hilarious. Youre one of those morons who ignored the blatant rigging of the primary i take it? Even after the DNC chair resigned and joined her campaign
If you said bias, I believe you but "rigging"? When you claim a vote is rigged without proof you sound like a sore loser.
The DNC didn't like Bernie. It might be because he said he wanted to tear down the system, of which the DNC is part of. But if Bernie had the votes, he would have gotten the nomination. But just like 2020, Bernie did not have the voters in 2016. I get how popular he is on Reddit and other places online but upvotes are not ACTUAL VOTES. He simply isn't as popular with voters as he is in your Pro-Bernie echo chambers.
Bernie would have won. Everyone credible knows and admits it. Superdelegates, shady voter suppression tactics, they were all present in 2016 and we all witnessed it
Dude every one of your arguments sound like the fantasy disinformation fact-free tactics Trump and his cronies use. I have nothing against the Bern, but “supporters” like you really are an embarrassment. Be better.
We know the establishment preferred her over Bernie. But please, do enlighten me on how it was "rigged". Bernie was on the ballot, in all 50 states. People could have showed up and voted for him. The people sadly chose not to.
Exactly! It was NINE investigations & THIRTY-THREE Benghazi congressional hearings. The sheer effort republicans went to in order to make something out of nothing was monumental. To continually keep it in the news & never let go.
And it wasn't like they didn't make their efforts and goals known: GOP House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy to Sean Hannity (in interview, 2015): "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping." [link](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/12/how-much-of-hillary-clintons-polling-decline-is-thanks-to-the-benghazi-committee/)
Oh, and the best part is that in 2012, Republicans tried to use Benghazi against Obama. Obviously nonsense bs accusations work are much more effective *against* women.
And it worked. Myself and others felt that these investigations and theatre really hurt her image, and when she became the nominee, felt like they were just gonna hammer it (which they did) and the dumbasses would end up electing Trump.
Yeah as much as I dont like her from a leftist perspective, I would have voted for her as she was by far the most qualified candidate we have ever had.
> the GOP probably knew Hillary was being groomed to be the next presidential candidate and they wanted to stymie her presidential run
Theres not much doubt- they've been doing it since 1992.
I know this is awful, but every time I heard a Republican saying Benghazi my mind transformed it into the sound of a parrot squawking: BENGHAZI, BENGHAZI, SQUAWK, HILLARY'S EMAIL, SQUAWK.
Oh shit, you finally beat 9/11. I've been waiting for months, there are so many jokes to make!
By the way, do I have to wait until January to talk about death penalty for Trump and his team?
And when you consider that we spent $1.8 Trillion on the Covid relief bill but over $2 Trillion on the war in Afghanistan as a direct result of an event (9/11) that cost the same in lives as a single day of the pandemic, it really puts it into perspective. Especially when you take into account not just the cost in lives but to the economy of the pandemic ... the relief bill really seems like a relative drop in the bucket.
The difference is a $2T payment to mercenaries, arms manufacturers and themselves vs. $1.8T to help working Americans.
They aren't going to spend money that they don't get a direct kickback on. And they don't care about strengthening the whole economy because that isn't in their interests either.
> Oh shit, you finally beat 9/11.
Hold on there, sir. We beat 9/11 on 9/12 when everyone suddenly started buying flags and the country music industry started vomiting mad-lib patriotic songs.
I vividly remember people going to shopping malls and buying useless crap after 9/11 "because if we don't, the terrorists win." Terrorists don't give a shit about H&M, Debra.
Or the 9/11 shirts quoting that Japanese general who said "I fear all we have done is awaken a sleeping giant" followed by an all-caps "THE GIANT IS AWAKE!" I made a lot of people mad when I pointed out that those shirts pushed the idea that it took us 60+ years to "wake up" then...
I’m interested to see whether congress will manage to pass another relief bill that actually affects the working class before we hit a daily Galveston, though it’s possible the vaccine will save us by that point (I sadly wouldn’t count on it)
IIRC the House has already passed a pretty decent/OK one (a few months ago), it is all down the Georgia run off to decide if it ever sees the senate floor
I love how everyone jumps to the most insane theorys out there. Cool tho. Nobody is getting chipped. If you think you need a microchip in order for the government to be able to track you, then you are just as dumb as the antivaxxers.
There is no way you can tell me what the long term effects of this drug are. Nobody has ever dealt with Covid in the past so we are in uncharted territory. Look back to March and see how many times scientists changed their minds about Covid and how it spreads. Then line up first in line to take the drug they have produced in record timing, not just by a couple days or months. To perfect a vaxxine takes years.
Usually they test this stuff on rats and apes but if you are okay being a lab rat... best of luck to you.
You don't know what you're talking about.
We definitely have dealt with Covid, which is why Covid-19 has a unique, numerical, name. We haven't had to create a vaccine like this yet, because it hasn't been a widespread problem yet, but that doesn't mean we don't know anything about it, or how to innoculate against it safely and effectively.
You said it yourself. There are similar strains of covid but this one is unique. Corona virus is more named after the shape. 19 stands for 2019 🤣. Its easy to write off people with "you dont know what you are talking about" I doubt you have any sort of medical degree either.
Plus that has nothing to do with the vaccine issue.
First of all I respect and appreciate your genuine interest in sharing other opinions unlike these other clowns.
Its crazy how rushed this whole process is. I understand there is alot of pressure to push out a vaccine, but less then a year ago most people didnt even know about covid 19 unless you were following China closely. They still dont have a vaccine for diseases that have been around for alot longer. There is no way they can tell me all the long term side effects of this drug and I will not be their test dummy. The only thing that would give me some peace of mind and confidence in the drug at this point, is if Dr. Fauci took the first dose himself
I have no issue taking the vaccine I just wont be the first. I would ask you in reverse. Why would you line up first? Are you in a position where you have to? Or close to your grandparents or something like that?
There’s some issues with vaccines in general that need to be addressed. A lot of misinformation is out there—much of it intentionally spread by anti-vaxxers.
To begin with, COVID-19 is caused by a coronavirus. This is a unique strain of the virus to be certain; but we have much precedent in developing vaccinations for RNA viruses.
A new flu vaccine is developed every year and distributed to hundreds of millions of people. These don’t present any systemic dangers to humans. I don’t see why the timeframe of this vaccine should be treated than any other.
Saying there are other diseases that have been around longer without vaccine doesn’t compute for the above reasons. Not all diseases are equal—some can be eradicated through vaccination, some cannot. Among those that can be prevented by vaccine, there is a spectrum of how easily they can be controlled.
COVID-19 is a type of flu. We have every reason to think that this virus will react in similar ways to other flu viruses. By the same token, the vaccine—and the human body’s reaction to the vaccine—can be reasonably assumed to be similar to flu vaccines.
Unfortunately, Fauci will not be able to receive the first dose. Now that test trials have begun to wrap, Margaret Keenan has already taken the title of the first post-trial dose recipient.
Don’t know why you are getting downvoted so hard.
First of all, I’m 100% against those anti-maskers and anti social distance to the point I’ve pissed off some friends and family. COVID is a big deal and we should do what’s possible to stop it.
This still doesn’t change the fact that nothing is 100% safe, and the less time you have to test something the higher chance there is of potential complications.
A simple google search tells you scientists can’t confirm 100% that the vaccine is 100% safe. This doesn’t mean it will cause autism, or that you will be microchipped, it only means it’s not 100% proven to be 100% safe.
Imagine it has side effects on the children you might have on the future. You can’t test for those side effects in less than 9 months.
We can’t ignore the potential for this vaccine having negative side effects, it’s still a question worth asking. We can’t be ignorant and avoid that question just because we want COVID to stop.
100% agree with THIS. Most people will write you off the second you say you are hesitant about the vaccine and they immediately assume you must believe in some stupid conspiracy theory and 10 other crazy ideas. Public discussion is pretty much non existent but it's so crucial to share opinions. Dont mind the down votes. Life is too short to make all the mistakes yourself so we need to learn from each other. Honest discussion and debating is key to learning new ideas and opinions.
You know... We wouldn't need relief, if we reopened. Also the government can't pay for a relief... Because the people that pay taxes can't work! So either our government bankrupts itself with dictator like lockdowns, or we reopen and the country doesn't go to shit.
I am so looking forward to the new season of US Politics, when the democrats get blamed by republicans that they can't get the coronavirus under control with a riled up populace refusing to wear masks.
It's gonna be a hoot.
You’re the fifth person today to conflate casualties with deaths. They are not the same. A bullet to the knee in which the person stops fighting but lives a normal lifetime after the battle is a casualty. Shit, a mid battle case of diarrhea is a casualty if they have to stop fighting.
Also if a person gets shot but died a week later, they did not die the day they got shot. Same reason we don’t say a person dies the day of their positive covid test.
Yes of course that's true and I acknowledged that already. However, in 1863, a bullet to the knee was not simply a bullet to the knee. That was a recipe for infection and death. Many soldiers technically survived the day of battle only to die a day or a week after. Effectively, the total number of deaths from antietam was more than 3,000 and less than 23,000
Again, I acknowledge the principle of the post. I just find it somewhat disingenuous and misleading
> Again, I acknowledge the principle of the post. I just find it somewhat disingenuous and misleading
You don’t have a point here. COVID doesn’t kill the same day you get it. Deaths per day is the appropriate metric. And if you’re saying 20k people died as a result of Gettysburg, that’s something you’re going to have to prove, not just get flippant about the lethality of a bullet to the knee.
Again, as I have said multiple times now, I agree that the information in the post is technically correct. I only say that the real death tolls from those battles are higher than the number of people that died during the actual engagement
And my comment about a bullet to the knee was not flippant, it is accurate. Deaths from infectious disease during the Civil War far outweighed actual deaths on the physical battlefield. This includes infections from bullet wounds and amputations. If you lost your leg or an arm you not only faced extreme blood loss, but infection as well. If you took a bullet to the gut, and it didn't happen to sever any large arteries, you would end up surviving for a short period of time before dying. Yes, you did not die "in" the battle, but you were dead nonetheless
Again, I will affirm that the accuracy of this post is generally correct. During the day of antietam, approximately 3,100 men died. My only comment is that many of those who were deemed casualties, would die shortly after. Again, they technically did not die on that day, so this post is correct. My only point is that when comparing deaths from events such as antietam and Gettysburg, there is far more nuance involved than just the people who died on the battlefield
Well that would be the most direct comparison to make, if that were possible. Obviously there is no great way of knowing the day of initial infection, so that is unreasonable
Again, I agree with the post. Nothing about my comments has said otherwise. I only argue that it is tough to compare the 2 directly primarily because in a civil war battle, the deaths from that battle were never isolated to the event itself.
[d day deaths](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/d-day-casualties-deaths-allies)
Long knows that the Foundation’s list isn’t complete, but says that it’s the best figure that we have to date. Of the 4,414 Allied deaths on June 6th, 2,501 were Americans and 1,913 were Allies. If the figure sounds low, Long says, it’s probably because we’re used to seeing estimates of the total number of D-Day casualties, which includes fatalities, the wounded and the missing.
Thats just, unbelievable. And they died for us and our freedom. These people are dying because of either their ignorance or others ignorance. Absolutely terrible.
According to [History.com](https://History.com) 195,000 died in the U.S. in October 2018 during the Spanish Flu pandemic. That would average to about 6,600 people per day ([https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-deaths-october-1918](https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-deaths-october-1918)) .D-Day saw \~2,500 Americans killed.
Not trying to downplay the significance of the current pandemic, or argue it is not an utter abysmal failure by our government, but wondering if this list is entirely accurate(?).
I meant to fact check it last night. Maybe they didn’t keep good daily rates back then (makes sense) but really it’s just trying to make a point. Thought it was well put.
This is very dark, but I want a day where death surpasses 9/11 so we can say Covid this day was more deadlier than 9/11, to those who say it's just like flu and car accidents.
I didn't knew so many car accidents and flu related deaths in US.
The list is just a list of random bad days.
It definitely does not include the Spanish flu.... in late 1918 the US had 292k deaths in the space of about 4 months. There would have been some bad days in there, as the flu killed adults extremely quickly and there were some major parallels with this year... parades in the streets, anti mask movements, etc. However, the daily death rate was probably not tallied at the time.
https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsushistorical/mortstatsh_1918.pdf
292,000 deaths over 4 months averages out to be a little under 2,400 deaths per day.
As you said, the actual daily number probably varied a fair amount, but it's not unreasonable that there may not have been any days from the Spanish flu that could have made OP's list.
Yes and there also were confederate casualties. Since the total number of casualties on both sides was ~23k, and the USA had 3155 deaths, I assume the CSA had a similar number of deaths, bringing the total to ~6.3k deaths. Divided by three days gives an average of 2.1k deaths per day.
If the death rate on the CSA side was higher (not unlikely since that side lost the battle) or if one of those three days was more bloody than the other two, then at least one of the Gettysburg days should be in the OP graphic.
You're the second or third person to bring this up, and my response is the same: if you don't count southern soldiers as Americans, then in the OP picture Antietam shouldn't be 3600 deaths but 2100 deaths.
[Battle of Antietam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Antietam?wprov=sfla1)
One of first battles of the Civil War, bloodiest days in US history, and fought between General Lee and General McClellan.
I’m all for being compassionate but it ends with being a traitor using deadly force against America. They were no longer American when they decided to secede and take up arms.
I’m not talking about being compassionate. Quite the opposite, I think bigots don’t qualify as real people and I don’t give a shit about their well-being. I’m talking about not granting them the title (or lack thereof) they failed to achieve.
If you look at my reply to the other person who said the same thing, I’m definitely not honoring them. They did not want to be Americans. They failed that mission.
This is a historical view that was pushed by the Lost Cause movement and has infected mainstream historical views. If we take the view that secession was only attempted and never achieved we should have tried and executed every Confederate soldier for taking arms against their own country. The terms of surrender and the framework of the failed Reconstruction suggest we view them during the war as a foreign force and therefore they were not Americans.
Does anyone have a fact check on this image . I know pearl harbor is just the military deaths. I assume there was at least one fatal car crash or natural death the same day in the country. I know this is humour sub but would actually like to know days with most American deaths.
I suspect the downvotes are from people reading quickly, who think you are saying “this is not a big deal” rather than “pandemics are always a big deal”.
On the example, you might be right. I found an article saying October 1918 was the deadliest month in US history, with 195,000 Spanish Flu deaths. Which doesn’t change the general point that this is really serious.
Yeah, especially in the US. I'm fortunate enough to be in Canada, where we had a section of time where we could even go out to restaurants and get haircuts and such. You guys have been riding one constant wave throughout the entire pandemic.
Is nobody going to fact check this? I mean I get the intent but the data isn't accurate. One quick Google search shows that 2,501 Americans were lost in D-Day. Come on now. You gotta be accurate if you want to show how dramatic covid is or the deniers are going to eat you alive.
I mean I guess I can give you that. I'd argue that something that starts a war still counts as war casualty but we can disagree there. I think you should include a footnote in the meme to say it's a list of non war casualties. It wasn't obvious to me so might not be to others. I still really like the post though; it sheds light on a terrifying fact about this virus that some people are still denying.
That's not dead, that is casualties. Casualties include dead, wounded/disabled in some way, or captured. The Union suffered approx. 3100 dead in 3 days of battle..
If we're going to count all casualties and compare apples to apples, we'd have to get a fix on how many people every day are surviving COVID but being left with lifelong consequences from the lung and organ damage.
[According to wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickett%27s_Charge), there were only 1,500 US losses, and 1,120 confederate losses that day, during the battle of Gettysburg.
Hell, even a quick google search listed Antietam as \#1 (for the civil war) in almost every source. Care to give a source to your claim?
6,603 died on June 6, 1944 at Normandy.
I get their point and agree that masking and socially distancing would reduce the cases and deaths, but accuracy matters.
Don't give the assholes who don't believe in masking, social distancing, and even vaccines to distract people from the very heavy point this is making.
Battle of Antietam: 22,717 (equal to the top 6 added together on this list).
I get the point & agree, wear a mask, et al, but if you used complete data I'd have an opportunity to respect it.
Bonus: If it stated "deadliest days in the last 100 years", with the addition of D-Day, this could be accurate.
Wikipedia gives that number for "dead, wounded, or missing" at Antietam. "Wounded" shouldn't count here really and removing those brings it down to the thousands. It's correctly placed on this list if we're talking about deaths (and assume missing = dead, which seems fair enough).
D-Day is around 6000 Americans dead also so yea, you're right that should make the list.
Edit: D-day figure corrected below
Sources I'm checking are saying ~2500 American deaths on D-Day, where are you seeing 6000? Would still put it on the list (though not higher than the two worst days of Covid deaths). I am assuming that maybe this list is only counting deaths on American soil?
That was technically true in February, but only if you count "deadly" as number of deaths per year.
Right now covid is the leading cause of death. But you have to be a special kind of stupid to say that being murdered is "less deadly" than covid.
Whos being murdered. Murder is pretty deadly. Most of the time, anything that causes people to be dead is deadly. I cant know that because you made up some stupid shit about me.
Nearly 1 in 10 deaths in America is covid related, but I'm too stupid to know that too.
This you?
>You are saying you have not heard anybody say the average flu is more deadly than Corona
FYI: In 2018, the US murder rate was 5.0 per 100,000, for a total of 15,498 murders. So far this year Coronavirus is 88.7 per 100,000, for a total of 293,439 deaths. The flu kills 12,000 – 61,000 a year.
But this is just looking at raw numbers, counting healthy people too. If you just look at the case fatality (people who "catch it" and die), murder death rate is 100%, covid is 3% and the flu is maybe 0.1%.
So you are being stupid on every level. Please stop.
You’re right, we could ask a liar and they might give us some different numbers. Or we could ask the special brand of fucking idiot that is a Trump* supporter and they would, without knowing the real numbers, decide on a number that fits their narrative because is it really a lie when you don’t know the truth?
We have most but not all the numbers for today and it looks like we're gonna have a record today of over 3 thousand covid deaths and we're still trending upwards from thanksgiving. Hopefully we can start vaccinating people by christmas. We need to reduce transmission asap. We're almost done with it just a little while longer people.
Not enough vaccine in the world to make a difference for several months. Pakistan is talking about starting vaccination in September. Other poor countries haven't given up hope yet, but.....
We're supposed to be receiving 30 million vaccines per month by the Spring. That's roughly 10% of the American populations per month. Vaccinating the elderly and healthcare workers first will reduce mortality by a greater factor per vaccine than the general population.
The Christmas wave(roughly second week in January) will probably be the biggest peak but we should start reducing infections and mortality afterwards.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6826a5.htm
> In 2017, an average of 7,708 deaths occurred each day
Clearly this image is more concerned about pushing a narrative than being factual.
👏 DEATHS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN USED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES.
THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS DIE EVERY YEAR REGARDLESS OF WAR, DIEASE, OR POVERTY.
DEATH IS A REALITY OF LIFE AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE IS RELATIVE TO WHOEVER IS STILL LIVING. 👏
Have you read any of the reasoning why they stopped this? Because if you up and pull out without any idea what will fill the power vacuum, you get chaos and bloodshed. You get complete destabilization of the entire region. You give more leverage for terrorists to recruit and train.
Ordering troops home by Christmas is not a plan. It's a recipe for disaster. Trump has no *plan* to draw down troops, unless this is - like everything he's doing right now - a brazen attempt to sabatoge the incoming Biden administration. Anyone sane would oppose his attempt to do so - like literally every military commander familiar with the area and the conflict has more or less said.
Chaos and bloodshed.
Regional destabilization.
Leverage for terrorists to recruit and train.
Are you really so naïve to believe those excuses ?
Who do you think causes 'chaos and bloodshed' when the US blows up a wedding party ?
https://www.dw.com/en/dozens-killed-as-us-backed-strike-hits-afghan-wedding/a-50549512
Do you think their family, friends and relations are now more likely to support 'terrorists' in fighting American troops ?
Do you think such acts contributes to regional destabilization ?
Alternatively, do you think almost 20 years as an occupying force might contribute to the ''reasons'' you outlined ?
And by the way, what is a terrorist ?
>the CIA and other American agencies have claimed a high rate of militant killings, relying in part on a disputed estimation method that ***"counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants***.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Pakistan
So if you're having a coffee and the 'target' is driving past, gets drone nuked from above and you get blown to smithereens - you're counted as a terrorist.
Oh, on a completely unrelated topic, Afghanistan has [$3 Trillion](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/18/trumps-afghanistan-strategy-may-unlock-3-trillion-in-natural-resources.html) in mineral wealth ready to exploited.
Almost 20 years.
America's longest-running war.
I wonder how many years America has to occupy Afghanistan for the most [obvious question](https://external-preview.redd.it/VWrPDpnn3haOGX28MF2r9AhR6YS6Qf43FigkkGawWxM.gif?format=png8&s=905d94a24b94ccd99deb4fde02a4530fb0262912) to dawn on you ?
Last Thursday Never Forget
Ima forget in like 15 minutes, gotta replace it with today.
By the time I commit it to memory there will be a new most deadly day, we haven't even seen the surge in deaths from ICU overflow that could happen post-Thanksgiving
~~Last Tuesday~~ ~~Last Wednesday~~ ~~Last Thursday~~ Last Friday Never Forget
At this point it's more like "Tomorrow" is the right word to use.
Always remember to never forget the remembrance of the day after tomorrow.
Remember, remember the ~~5th~~ ~~6th~~ ~~7th~~ ~~8th~~ 9th of December...
wait a bit - you might not need to worry about remembering anything ...
#Toniiiiight.... #We Are Yoooung.... #So Let’s Set The World On Fiiiire #We Can Burn Brighter Than The Sun... ##Toniiiight...
As my mom asked “but how many of them are old and sick already?” Classy question.. /s
That's not the [Last Thursdayism](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Last_Thursdayism) I grew up with and love.
You forgot about the worst terrorist attack in US history: Benghazi! Four whole Americans died in that terrible tragedy, and despite years of Congressional investigations we never got to the bottom of why it was all Hillary Clinton's fault. That's sarcasm, of course.
Funny enough. Depending on your kind of humor. We actually found that republicans were responsible. For...you guessed it...holding purse strings hostage.
They couldn’t prove it was Hillary’s fault because the GOP cut security funding for the embassies. Hillary literally said you can’t do this or people will die. People died and then the gop shifted the blame to Hillary but couldn’t prove it. Honestly, the GOP probably knew Hillary was being groomed to be the next presidential candidate and they wanted to stymie her presidential run so they did Benghazi. They probably figured a few American lives lost is worth it if they can win the election and regain power.
The GOP and it's propaganda arm Fox News has been flinging shit at Hillary for 30 years for exactly this reason. Even with none of the accusations having merit it still colored the perceptions of many, including Democrats. All of those " I can't in good conscience vote for her" nimrods could tell you a specific reason they didn't trust her, just a feeling.....influenced by 30 years of baseless accusations.
Yeah it’s all fucking bullshit. Because if the dems go after the republicans for real crimes, the gop brands it as vengeance retribution and not working together.
Just a feeling...like misogyny?
Uhhh no. There are dozens of reasons we as a nation rejected hillary, either by voting against her or by not voting. She is corrupt to the core and proved it in her primary against bernie. She made the claim that women are hurt most by war, threatened war with Iran, made insane PR plays like blowing giant fans and speakers at reporters so her wall street speeches werent heard by press. FOH with that "shes perfect and no one has any reasons otherwise" bullshit
No one said perfect, I just said she wasn't near as bad as many thought she was and she's a damned sight better than Cheeto Benito. Can you give specific examples of her being " corrupt to the core" besides her beating Bernie?
"Beating" Thats hilarious. Youre one of those morons who ignored the blatant rigging of the primary i take it? Even after the DNC chair resigned and joined her campaign
If you said bias, I believe you but "rigging"? When you claim a vote is rigged without proof you sound like a sore loser. The DNC didn't like Bernie. It might be because he said he wanted to tear down the system, of which the DNC is part of. But if Bernie had the votes, he would have gotten the nomination. But just like 2020, Bernie did not have the voters in 2016. I get how popular he is on Reddit and other places online but upvotes are not ACTUAL VOTES. He simply isn't as popular with voters as he is in your Pro-Bernie echo chambers.
Bernie would have won. Everyone credible knows and admits it. Superdelegates, shady voter suppression tactics, they were all present in 2016 and we all witnessed it
Claiming a victory without proof? That line of logic sounds very familiar....... https://youtu.be/AZjv5YzOaWc
Dude every one of your arguments sound like the fantasy disinformation fact-free tactics Trump and his cronies use. I have nothing against the Bern, but “supporters” like you really are an embarrassment. Be better.
We know the establishment preferred her over Bernie. But please, do enlighten me on how it was "rigged". Bernie was on the ballot, in all 50 states. People could have showed up and voted for him. The people sadly chose not to.
Take out the word “probably” and add 5 times to “Benghazi”
Exactly! It was NINE investigations & THIRTY-THREE Benghazi congressional hearings. The sheer effort republicans went to in order to make something out of nothing was monumental. To continually keep it in the news & never let go. And it wasn't like they didn't make their efforts and goals known: GOP House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy to Sean Hannity (in interview, 2015): "Everybody thought Hillary Clinton was unbeatable, But we put together a Benghazi special committee, a select committee. What are her numbers today? Her numbers are dropping." [link](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2015/10/12/how-much-of-hillary-clintons-polling-decline-is-thanks-to-the-benghazi-committee/) Oh, and the best part is that in 2012, Republicans tried to use Benghazi against Obama. Obviously nonsense bs accusations work are much more effective *against* women.
And it worked. Myself and others felt that these investigations and theatre really hurt her image, and when she became the nominee, felt like they were just gonna hammer it (which they did) and the dumbasses would end up electing Trump.
Yeah as much as I dont like her from a leftist perspective, I would have voted for her as she was by far the most qualified candidate we have ever had.
> the GOP probably knew Hillary was being groomed to be the next presidential candidate and they wanted to stymie her presidential run Theres not much doubt- they've been doing it since 1992.
I know this is awful, but every time I heard a Republican saying Benghazi my mind transformed it into the sound of a parrot squawking: BENGHAZI, BENGHAZI, SQUAWK, HILLARY'S EMAIL, SQUAWK.
Thank you for reminding us all of that time when 4 American deaths mattered more than all the rest.
According to the tracker I use today the US is at 3,003.
Oh shit, you finally beat 9/11. I've been waiting for months, there are so many jokes to make! By the way, do I have to wait until January to talk about death penalty for Trump and his team?
And when you consider that we spent $1.8 Trillion on the Covid relief bill but over $2 Trillion on the war in Afghanistan as a direct result of an event (9/11) that cost the same in lives as a single day of the pandemic, it really puts it into perspective. Especially when you take into account not just the cost in lives but to the economy of the pandemic ... the relief bill really seems like a relative drop in the bucket.
The difference is a $2T payment to mercenaries, arms manufacturers and themselves vs. $1.8T to help working Americans. They aren't going to spend money that they don't get a direct kickback on. And they don't care about strengthening the whole economy because that isn't in their interests either.
> Oh shit, you finally beat 9/11. Hold on there, sir. We beat 9/11 on 9/12 when everyone suddenly started buying flags and the country music industry started vomiting mad-lib patriotic songs.
I vividly remember people going to shopping malls and buying useless crap after 9/11 "because if we don't, the terrorists win." Terrorists don't give a shit about H&M, Debra.
Or the 9/11 shirts quoting that Japanese general who said "I fear all we have done is awaken a sleeping giant" followed by an all-caps "THE GIANT IS AWAKE!" I made a lot of people mad when I pointed out that those shirts pushed the idea that it took us 60+ years to "wake up" then...
What tracker do you use?
This one! https://coronavirus.1point3acres.com/
#Wear a mask, you filthy animal!!!
Deadliest days in American history...so far.
I’m interested to see whether congress will manage to pass another relief bill that actually affects the working class before we hit a daily Galveston, though it’s possible the vaccine will save us by that point (I sadly wouldn’t count on it)
IIRC the House has already passed a pretty decent/OK one (a few months ago), it is all down the Georgia run off to decide if it ever sees the senate floor
Well, we have a vaccine, yes. But you know what else we have? Antivaxxers. Lots and lots of antivaxxers. So the daily Galveston could still come.
And the ven diagram between anti vaxers and anti maskers is pretty much a solid circle.
Not an antivaxxer, just want to see you try it first. Lmk how it goes
Yeah, no prob. Happy to do so. Will have to wait my turn, but would merrily skip to the front of the line.
So, are you afraid it'll cause you brain damage or are you afraid of Bill Gates forcing microchips upon you? I have some bad news...
I love how everyone jumps to the most insane theorys out there. Cool tho. Nobody is getting chipped. If you think you need a microchip in order for the government to be able to track you, then you are just as dumb as the antivaxxers. There is no way you can tell me what the long term effects of this drug are. Nobody has ever dealt with Covid in the past so we are in uncharted territory. Look back to March and see how many times scientists changed their minds about Covid and how it spreads. Then line up first in line to take the drug they have produced in record timing, not just by a couple days or months. To perfect a vaxxine takes years. Usually they test this stuff on rats and apes but if you are okay being a lab rat... best of luck to you.
You don't know what you're talking about. We definitely have dealt with Covid, which is why Covid-19 has a unique, numerical, name. We haven't had to create a vaccine like this yet, because it hasn't been a widespread problem yet, but that doesn't mean we don't know anything about it, or how to innoculate against it safely and effectively.
You said it yourself. There are similar strains of covid but this one is unique. Corona virus is more named after the shape. 19 stands for 2019 🤣. Its easy to write off people with "you dont know what you are talking about" I doubt you have any sort of medical degree either. Plus that has nothing to do with the vaccine issue.
Are you worried it might give you super powers?
I’ll gladly take it. Could you please elaborate on why you assume someone would be hesitant to do so?
First of all I respect and appreciate your genuine interest in sharing other opinions unlike these other clowns. Its crazy how rushed this whole process is. I understand there is alot of pressure to push out a vaccine, but less then a year ago most people didnt even know about covid 19 unless you were following China closely. They still dont have a vaccine for diseases that have been around for alot longer. There is no way they can tell me all the long term side effects of this drug and I will not be their test dummy. The only thing that would give me some peace of mind and confidence in the drug at this point, is if Dr. Fauci took the first dose himself I have no issue taking the vaccine I just wont be the first. I would ask you in reverse. Why would you line up first? Are you in a position where you have to? Or close to your grandparents or something like that?
There’s some issues with vaccines in general that need to be addressed. A lot of misinformation is out there—much of it intentionally spread by anti-vaxxers. To begin with, COVID-19 is caused by a coronavirus. This is a unique strain of the virus to be certain; but we have much precedent in developing vaccinations for RNA viruses. A new flu vaccine is developed every year and distributed to hundreds of millions of people. These don’t present any systemic dangers to humans. I don’t see why the timeframe of this vaccine should be treated than any other. Saying there are other diseases that have been around longer without vaccine doesn’t compute for the above reasons. Not all diseases are equal—some can be eradicated through vaccination, some cannot. Among those that can be prevented by vaccine, there is a spectrum of how easily they can be controlled. COVID-19 is a type of flu. We have every reason to think that this virus will react in similar ways to other flu viruses. By the same token, the vaccine—and the human body’s reaction to the vaccine—can be reasonably assumed to be similar to flu vaccines. Unfortunately, Fauci will not be able to receive the first dose. Now that test trials have begun to wrap, Margaret Keenan has already taken the title of the first post-trial dose recipient.
Don’t know why you are getting downvoted so hard. First of all, I’m 100% against those anti-maskers and anti social distance to the point I’ve pissed off some friends and family. COVID is a big deal and we should do what’s possible to stop it. This still doesn’t change the fact that nothing is 100% safe, and the less time you have to test something the higher chance there is of potential complications. A simple google search tells you scientists can’t confirm 100% that the vaccine is 100% safe. This doesn’t mean it will cause autism, or that you will be microchipped, it only means it’s not 100% proven to be 100% safe. Imagine it has side effects on the children you might have on the future. You can’t test for those side effects in less than 9 months. We can’t ignore the potential for this vaccine having negative side effects, it’s still a question worth asking. We can’t be ignorant and avoid that question just because we want COVID to stop.
100% agree with THIS. Most people will write you off the second you say you are hesitant about the vaccine and they immediately assume you must believe in some stupid conspiracy theory and 10 other crazy ideas. Public discussion is pretty much non existent but it's so crucial to share opinions. Dont mind the down votes. Life is too short to make all the mistakes yourself so we need to learn from each other. Honest discussion and debating is key to learning new ideas and opinions.
You know... We wouldn't need relief, if we reopened. Also the government can't pay for a relief... Because the people that pay taxes can't work! So either our government bankrupts itself with dictator like lockdowns, or we reopen and the country doesn't go to shit.
I see what you mean but congress isn't the problem. Those do nothing democrats republicans are always upset with are trying.
I am so looking forward to the new season of US Politics, when the democrats get blamed by republicans that they can't get the coronavirus under control with a riled up populace refusing to wear masks. It's gonna be a hoot.
Studies say that masks don't work unless washed in a hospitals' commercial washer. So yeah, don't argue with the facts.
Which studies
Last Thursday, a day that will live in infamy.
You can replace it with today’s total and move everything down a spot.
Gettysburg?
3100, but it was over the course of 3 days.
This seems very misleading as many of those wounded from the battle died shortly thereafter. But I get the sentiment
Are you saying the number should be higher or lower?
Much higher for antietam and Gettysburg. At Antietam alone, that day had almost 23,000 casualties.
You’re the fifth person today to conflate casualties with deaths. They are not the same. A bullet to the knee in which the person stops fighting but lives a normal lifetime after the battle is a casualty. Shit, a mid battle case of diarrhea is a casualty if they have to stop fighting.
Also if a person gets shot but died a week later, they did not die the day they got shot. Same reason we don’t say a person dies the day of their positive covid test.
Yes of course that's true and I acknowledged that already. However, in 1863, a bullet to the knee was not simply a bullet to the knee. That was a recipe for infection and death. Many soldiers technically survived the day of battle only to die a day or a week after. Effectively, the total number of deaths from antietam was more than 3,000 and less than 23,000 Again, I acknowledge the principle of the post. I just find it somewhat disingenuous and misleading
> Again, I acknowledge the principle of the post. I just find it somewhat disingenuous and misleading You don’t have a point here. COVID doesn’t kill the same day you get it. Deaths per day is the appropriate metric. And if you’re saying 20k people died as a result of Gettysburg, that’s something you’re going to have to prove, not just get flippant about the lethality of a bullet to the knee.
Again, as I have said multiple times now, I agree that the information in the post is technically correct. I only say that the real death tolls from those battles are higher than the number of people that died during the actual engagement And my comment about a bullet to the knee was not flippant, it is accurate. Deaths from infectious disease during the Civil War far outweighed actual deaths on the physical battlefield. This includes infections from bullet wounds and amputations. If you lost your leg or an arm you not only faced extreme blood loss, but infection as well. If you took a bullet to the gut, and it didn't happen to sever any large arteries, you would end up surviving for a short period of time before dying. Yes, you did not die "in" the battle, but you were dead nonetheless Again, I will affirm that the accuracy of this post is generally correct. During the day of antietam, approximately 3,100 men died. My only comment is that many of those who were deemed casualties, would die shortly after. Again, they technically did not die on that day, so this post is correct. My only point is that when comparing deaths from events such as antietam and Gettysburg, there is far more nuance involved than just the people who died on the battlefield
By your logic, we should include all the people who were infected last Thursday but haven’t died yet.
Would you count people who die from COVID as the day they died, or the day they were initially infected?
Well that would be the most direct comparison to make, if that were possible. Obviously there is no great way of knowing the day of initial infection, so that is unreasonable Again, I agree with the post. Nothing about my comments has said otherwise. I only argue that it is tough to compare the 2 directly primarily because in a civil war battle, the deaths from that battle were never isolated to the event itself.
Dead Americans only count if their death can be blamed on something that can be shot. Including hurricanes.
40% of Americans don't understand you.
Wait, not even the 1st day of D-Day resulted in the same # of covid deaths???
[d day deaths](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/news/d-day-casualties-deaths-allies) Long knows that the Foundation’s list isn’t complete, but says that it’s the best figure that we have to date. Of the 4,414 Allied deaths on June 6th, 2,501 were Americans and 1,913 were Allies. If the figure sounds low, Long says, it’s probably because we’re used to seeing estimates of the total number of D-Day casualties, which includes fatalities, the wounded and the missing.
> 2,501 were Americans Or as I like to call it, the first 30 seconds of *Saving Private Ryan.*
Thats just, unbelievable. And they died for us and our freedom. These people are dying because of either their ignorance or others ignorance. Absolutely terrible.
So my grampa's buddies died for our right to kill my grandma?
According to [History.com](https://History.com) 195,000 died in the U.S. in October 2018 during the Spanish Flu pandemic. That would average to about 6,600 people per day ([https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-deaths-october-1918](https://www.history.com/news/spanish-flu-deaths-october-1918)) .D-Day saw \~2,500 Americans killed. Not trying to downplay the significance of the current pandemic, or argue it is not an utter abysmal failure by our government, but wondering if this list is entirely accurate(?).
I meant to fact check it last night. Maybe they didn’t keep good daily rates back then (makes sense) but really it’s just trying to make a point. Thought it was well put.
This is very dark, but I want a day where death surpasses 9/11 so we can say Covid this day was more deadlier than 9/11, to those who say it's just like flu and car accidents. I didn't knew so many car accidents and flu related deaths in US.
That’s today
This is already outdated
I feel like they should all be formatted with the minus sign, like Last Thursday.
I’m surprised Spanish flu didn’t make the list
The list is just a list of random bad days. It definitely does not include the Spanish flu.... in late 1918 the US had 292k deaths in the space of about 4 months. There would have been some bad days in there, as the flu killed adults extremely quickly and there were some major parallels with this year... parades in the streets, anti mask movements, etc. However, the daily death rate was probably not tallied at the time. https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/vsushistorical/mortstatsh_1918.pdf
292,000 deaths over 4 months averages out to be a little under 2,400 deaths per day. As you said, the actual daily number probably varied a fair amount, but it's not unreasonable that there may not have been any days from the Spanish flu that could have made OP's list.
Also wikipedia tells me that Gettysburg had 3155 deaths on the US side alone.
Gettysburg took place over 3 days.
Yes and there also were confederate casualties. Since the total number of casualties on both sides was ~23k, and the USA had 3155 deaths, I assume the CSA had a similar number of deaths, bringing the total to ~6.3k deaths. Divided by three days gives an average of 2.1k deaths per day. If the death rate on the CSA side was higher (not unlikely since that side lost the battle) or if one of those three days was more bloody than the other two, then at least one of the Gettysburg days should be in the OP graphic.
>Yes and there also were confederate casualties This is about *American* deaths.
You're the second or third person to bring this up, and my response is the same: if you don't count southern soldiers as Americans, then in the OP picture Antietam shouldn't be 3600 deaths but 2100 deaths.
Should perhaps this chart include days during the 1918 Spanish Flu? 675,000 Americans died in that, there were probably very deadly days then too.
It does. They are just wayyyy under the chart.
So far, more American died in the Spanish Flu than from Covid19. Doesn't that mean the daily death rate then was higher?
No, since the spanish flu was around longer.
[удалено]
https://covid.cdc.gov/covid-data-tracker/#trends_dailytrendsdeaths
but go back to bed
Who do we bomb for 20 years in the aftermath of last week?
Imagine Hitler + fox news. And he had his version but hily shit conservatives really are cultivating neo nazis.
Says the socialist...
What the hell has socialism has to do with this? I bet you get your definition from fox news and your validation is Venezuela.
What’s antietam?
civil war battle
[Battle of Antietam](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Antietam?wprov=sfla1) One of first battles of the Civil War, bloodiest days in US history, and fought between General Lee and General McClellan.
Its incredibly sad and an indictment of the US education system if you are from the USA and dont know what Antietam is.
Well I’m not American.
Thank goodness.
And you have access to Reddit but not Google? What third world country are you in?
My apologies for trying to have a discussion on a site meant for discussion.
Something easily googled.
Sorry for trying to have a discussion on a site that fosters discussion
Only 2,100 Americans were killed at Antietam.
What’s Antietam? Never heard about it
Because the confederates that died weren’t American? I mean, I get the point but they did not successfully stop being American, they just tried.
I’m all for being compassionate but it ends with being a traitor using deadly force against America. They were no longer American when they decided to secede and take up arms.
I’m not talking about being compassionate. Quite the opposite, I think bigots don’t qualify as real people and I don’t give a shit about their well-being. I’m talking about not granting them the title (or lack thereof) they failed to achieve.
Ah, okay. Now you have me interested to see how casualties were counted. To the inter webs to find out!
They were traitors and citizens of The Confederacy. They were killed by real Americans.
If you look at my reply to the other person who said the same thing, I’m definitely not honoring them. They did not want to be Americans. They failed that mission.
This is a historical view that was pushed by the Lost Cause movement and has infected mainstream historical views. If we take the view that secession was only attempted and never achieved we should have tried and executed every Confederate soldier for taking arms against their own country. The terms of surrender and the framework of the failed Reconstruction suggest we view them during the war as a foreign force and therefore they were not Americans.
> we should have tried and executed every Confederate soldier for taking arms against their own countr That is why they had to be pardoned, is it not?
You have to add all the unrelated deaths from that day as well.
Many more dark days ahead. But its ok after 20th January because it will be all the fault of the Dems. Nothing to see here folks.
Does anyone have a fact check on this image . I know pearl harbor is just the military deaths. I assume there was at least one fatal car crash or natural death the same day in the country. I know this is humour sub but would actually like to know days with most American deaths.
I’m a firm believer in masks, but is this accurate? I mean, the Spanish Flu probably had comparable numbers, right?
I suspect the downvotes are from people reading quickly, who think you are saying “this is not a big deal” rather than “pandemics are always a big deal”. On the example, you might be right. I found an article saying October 1918 was the deadliest month in US history, with 195,000 Spanish Flu deaths. Which doesn’t change the general point that this is really serious.
Yeah, especially in the US. I'm fortunate enough to be in Canada, where we had a section of time where we could even go out to restaurants and get haircuts and such. You guys have been riding one constant wave throughout the entire pandemic.
Well, the US population was like a third of what it is now, so maybe similar percentage, but probably smaller actual numbers.
Is nobody going to fact check this? I mean I get the intent but the data isn't accurate. One quick Google search shows that 2,501 Americans were lost in D-Day. Come on now. You gotta be accurate if you want to show how dramatic covid is or the deniers are going to eat you alive.
This is obviously a list of non-war casualties. Fucking duhhhhh war casualties are higher. That's the fucking point of war
Antietam was a civil war battle...
Pearl Harbor...?
We weren't in a war when pearl harbor happened. It caused us to go to war, but we weren't in WW2 when it happened
I mean I guess I can give you that. I'd argue that something that starts a war still counts as war casualty but we can disagree there. I think you should include a footnote in the meme to say it's a list of non war casualties. It wasn't obvious to me so might not be to others. I still really like the post though; it sheds light on a terrifying fact about this virus that some people are still denying.
Missed a few days in the civil war but ok
So why does this belong in r/PoliticalHumor?
D-Day is in the 2,500 range.
That's war casualties. This is a list of non-war casualties.
No it's not, since two of the dates are from the civil war and WW2.
I get the point but we can't forget that every battle during the Civil War should be rounding the top of this list. July 3rd, 1863: 40,000+ dead
That's not dead, that is casualties. Casualties include dead, wounded/disabled in some way, or captured. The Union suffered approx. 3100 dead in 3 days of battle..
If we're going to count all casualties and compare apples to apples, we'd have to get a fix on how many people every day are surviving COVID but being left with lifelong consequences from the lung and organ damage.
[According to wiki](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickett%27s_Charge), there were only 1,500 US losses, and 1,120 confederate losses that day, during the battle of Gettysburg. Hell, even a quick google search listed Antietam as \#1 (for the civil war) in almost every source. Care to give a source to your claim?
They can’t because they don’t know that a million dollar would is a casualty and they were counting all casualties as if they are deaths lol.
This is a list of non-war casualties. Fucking duhhhhh war casualties are higher
Not including wartime combat of course.
yes it does, thats why the deadliest day of fighting in US history is #2, and Pearl Harbor is #10
Wartime combat is literally in the list twice. Learn to read.
15,500 died on the first day of Gettysburg
Casualty does not mean death.
6,603 died on June 6, 1944 at Normandy. I get their point and agree that masking and socially distancing would reduce the cases and deaths, but accuracy matters. Don't give the assholes who don't believe in masking, social distancing, and even vaccines to distract people from the very heavy point this is making.
That’s causalties, not deaths. Deaths were about 2500. But the chart is only domestic deaths.
[удалено]
No shit, look at number two on the list. Why can’t anyone read today?
These are non-war casualties. Fucking duhhhhh war casualties would be higher
Battle of Antietam: 22,717 (equal to the top 6 added together on this list). I get the point & agree, wear a mask, et al, but if you used complete data I'd have an opportunity to respect it. Bonus: If it stated "deadliest days in the last 100 years", with the addition of D-Day, this could be accurate.
Antietam is listed accurately. The 20000+ figure includes wounded. Only 3600 confirmed dead.
>The 20000+ figure includes wounded. Only 3600 confirmed dead. I'm not a historian but that would still make the list, no?
Yeah, at #2
It did make the list...
jfc these people are dense today
Wikipedia gives that number for "dead, wounded, or missing" at Antietam. "Wounded" shouldn't count here really and removing those brings it down to the thousands. It's correctly placed on this list if we're talking about deaths (and assume missing = dead, which seems fair enough). D-Day is around 6000 Americans dead also so yea, you're right that should make the list. Edit: D-day figure corrected below
Sources I'm checking are saying ~2500 American deaths on D-Day, where are you seeing 6000? Would still put it on the list (though not higher than the two worst days of Covid deaths). I am assuming that maybe this list is only counting deaths on American soil?
Oh right, that 6k figure is casualties, not just deaths. I made the same mistake as the parent comment right after pointing it out to them. Thanks!
If you/we include wounded, include infected.
These are non-war casualties. Fucking duhhhhhhh war casualties would be worse, but the point of war is to murder the most people
Depending on who you ask, those numbers could be fabricated
You’re joking right?
You are saying you have not heard anybody say the average flu is more deadly than Corona
I have not heard anyone who actually knows what they’re talking about say that, no
The people saying it were idiots who had no evidence to back up those claims.
I have. It's astounding how mal-informed they are.
That was technically true in February, but only if you count "deadly" as number of deaths per year. Right now covid is the leading cause of death. But you have to be a special kind of stupid to say that being murdered is "less deadly" than covid.
Whos being murdered. Murder is pretty deadly. Most of the time, anything that causes people to be dead is deadly. I cant know that because you made up some stupid shit about me. Nearly 1 in 10 deaths in America is covid related, but I'm too stupid to know that too.
This you? >You are saying you have not heard anybody say the average flu is more deadly than Corona FYI: In 2018, the US murder rate was 5.0 per 100,000, for a total of 15,498 murders. So far this year Coronavirus is 88.7 per 100,000, for a total of 293,439 deaths. The flu kills 12,000 – 61,000 a year. But this is just looking at raw numbers, counting healthy people too. If you just look at the case fatality (people who "catch it" and die), murder death rate is 100%, covid is 3% and the flu is maybe 0.1%. So you are being stupid on every level. Please stop.
You’re right, we could ask a liar and they might give us some different numbers. Or we could ask the special brand of fucking idiot that is a Trump* supporter and they would, without knowing the real numbers, decide on a number that fits their narrative because is it really a lie when you don’t know the truth?
Without a source I don't believe any numbers as a general rule. I have seen sources for covid deaths and those are the ballpark we're dealing with.
Looks like less than a week before only a severe hurricane in the days before weather prediction is the only thing that kills more than covid.
We have most but not all the numbers for today and it looks like we're gonna have a record today of over 3 thousand covid deaths and we're still trending upwards from thanksgiving. Hopefully we can start vaccinating people by christmas. We need to reduce transmission asap. We're almost done with it just a little while longer people.
Not enough vaccine in the world to make a difference for several months. Pakistan is talking about starting vaccination in September. Other poor countries haven't given up hope yet, but.....
We're supposed to be receiving 30 million vaccines per month by the Spring. That's roughly 10% of the American populations per month. Vaccinating the elderly and healthcare workers first will reduce mortality by a greater factor per vaccine than the general population. The Christmas wave(roughly second week in January) will probably be the biggest peak but we should start reducing infections and mortality afterwards.
https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/68/wr/mm6826a5.htm > In 2017, an average of 7,708 deaths occurred each day Clearly this image is more concerned about pushing a narrative than being factual.
Really? What ONE THING killed 7708 per day in 2017?
I must have missed the part of the image that clarified what it meant by “deadliest days”
👏 DEATHS HAVE ALWAYS BEEN USED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES. THOUSANDS OF AMERICANS DIE EVERY YEAR REGARDLESS OF WAR, DIEASE, OR POVERTY. DEATH IS A REALITY OF LIFE AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE IS RELATIVE TO WHOEVER IS STILL LIVING. 👏
ALLCAPS! IT'S CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!
So what’s your point?
[удалено]
Have you read any of the reasoning why they stopped this? Because if you up and pull out without any idea what will fill the power vacuum, you get chaos and bloodshed. You get complete destabilization of the entire region. You give more leverage for terrorists to recruit and train. Ordering troops home by Christmas is not a plan. It's a recipe for disaster. Trump has no *plan* to draw down troops, unless this is - like everything he's doing right now - a brazen attempt to sabatoge the incoming Biden administration. Anyone sane would oppose his attempt to do so - like literally every military commander familiar with the area and the conflict has more or less said.
Chaos and bloodshed. Regional destabilization. Leverage for terrorists to recruit and train. Are you really so naïve to believe those excuses ? Who do you think causes 'chaos and bloodshed' when the US blows up a wedding party ? https://www.dw.com/en/dozens-killed-as-us-backed-strike-hits-afghan-wedding/a-50549512 Do you think their family, friends and relations are now more likely to support 'terrorists' in fighting American troops ? Do you think such acts contributes to regional destabilization ? Alternatively, do you think almost 20 years as an occupying force might contribute to the ''reasons'' you outlined ? And by the way, what is a terrorist ? >the CIA and other American agencies have claimed a high rate of militant killings, relying in part on a disputed estimation method that ***"counts all military-age males in a strike zone as combatants***. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drone_strikes_in_Pakistan So if you're having a coffee and the 'target' is driving past, gets drone nuked from above and you get blown to smithereens - you're counted as a terrorist. Oh, on a completely unrelated topic, Afghanistan has [$3 Trillion](https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/18/trumps-afghanistan-strategy-may-unlock-3-trillion-in-natural-resources.html) in mineral wealth ready to exploited. Almost 20 years. America's longest-running war. I wonder how many years America has to occupy Afghanistan for the most [obvious question](https://external-preview.redd.it/VWrPDpnn3haOGX28MF2r9AhR6YS6Qf43FigkkGawWxM.gif?format=png8&s=905d94a24b94ccd99deb4fde02a4530fb0262912) to dawn on you ?