[Spliffdaddy]

According to the leftwing website 'iraqbodycount.net', as of May 1st 2003 there have been just about 6,000 non-naturally-occurring deaths in Iraq. (4,235/yr) 0.0001694% of population killed

In 2002 Washington DC, with nearly 600,000 residents, counted 262 murders. 0.0004366% of population killed

The odds of being killed in Washington DC are 300% greater than of being killed in Iraq.

[Spliffdaddy]

There were 16,500 murders in the USA last year.

That exceeds the number of violent deaths in Iraq since the first day coalition forces entered Iraq (13-15,000).

[BlueSky]

That will be a great comfort to the soldiers in Iraq.

And if it's so bad in D.C., maybe we need a regime change there too.

[Spliffdaddy]

If Iraq is a quagmire - what do we call DC?

[Spliffdaddy]

That sorta puts the Iraq thing into perspective.

"OMG it's soooo dangerous in Iraq"

Tuck in your blouse. Your panties are showing.

[Spliffdaddy]

Care to take a guess at how many American cities are more dangerous than Iraq?

Pretty much every American city with a population of 500,000 or more.

[Spliffdaddy]

Rest easy, Iraqis.

You're safer than where I am right now.

[BlueSky]

Um, did you want to be alone?

[Spliffdaddy]

Reinstating the draft in our major cities - and sending all draftees to Iraq - would save lives.


Spin that one, lefties.

[Spliffdaddy]

BTW, new rule.

No Kerry supporters can post in this thread.

In fact, if you aren't American and you aren't conservative - click the 'back' button and move along. You have your own thread...and I was kind enough to not post in it. Show me the same respect iffin you don't mind.

PS, feel free to check my math. If it looks like I'm wrong, then you're probably wrong. The math is correct. Iraq is statistically safer than most large cities in the USA.

edit: and safer than most major cities worldwide.

[mikellanes]

So you can break down the US numbers by Cities, how bout you do that for Iraq?

[chalk_outline]

From: http://www.city-data.com/city/Eugene-Oregon.html

Crime in Eugene (2002):
* 2 murders (1.4 per 100,000) -- thats 8.4 murders if our population was 600,000. So I would say both places are screwed.

And I would imagine DC does a better job of documenting murders then they do in Iraq. I have a hunch lots of bodies just get stuck in the ground.

[SimeyTheLimey]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
If Iraq is a quagmire - what do we call DC?

Well, you know the city is built on a swamp.

[Shaddim]

Originally posted by Bluesky:
That will be a great comfort to the soldiers in Iraq.

And if it's so bad in D.C., maybe we need a regime change there too.

Hell yeah, kick the Liberals out! (they make up about 85% of the population)

[mitchell_pgh]

Hey... leave DC alone

[mitchell_pgh]

For the record, there is a rather small section of DC (South East) that represents almost all of the killings here.

[mitchell_pgh]

Originally posted by chalk_outline:
From: http://www.city-data.com/city/Eugene-Oregon.html

Crime in Eugene (2002):
* 2 murders (1.4 per 100,000) -- thats 8.4 murders if our population was 600,000. So I would say both places are screwed.

And I would imagine DC does a better job of documenting murders then they do in Iraq. I have a hunch lots of bodies just get stuck in the ground.

Funny you should say that... plenty of people find an untimely death in the rivers around DC... The trick is... they don't wash up in DC... they wash up in Virginia or Maryland...

[deedar]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
According to the leftwing website 'iraqbodycount.net', as of May 1st 2003 there have been just about 6,000 non-naturally-occurring deaths in Iraq. (4,235/yr) 0.0001694% of population killed

In 2002 Washington DC, with nearly 600,000 residents, counted 262 murders. 0.0004366% of population killed

The odds of being killed in Washington DC are 300% greater than of being killed in Iraq.

Actually, it may be something more like:

100K / 25M x 100 = 0.4% of the Iraqi population killed in the last 18 months.

Possibly 100K killed.

BTW, you need to multiply your numbers by 100 to get %.

[chalk_outline]

Originally posted by mitchell_pgh:
Funny you should say that... plenty of people find an untimely death in the rivers around DC... The trick is... they don't wash up in DC... they wash up in Virginia or Maryland...

That is nifty. Is this good or bad in your eyes?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally posted by deedar:
Actually, it may be something more like:

100K / 25M x 100 = 0.4% of the Iraqi population killed in the last 18 months.

Possibly 100K killed.

BTW, you need to multiply your numbers by 100 to get %.

Indeed, you are correct.

But that doesn't change the fact that your chances of being killed in Washington DC are 300% greater than being killed in Iraq....bogus, inflated, unsubstantiated death tolls aside (100K).

[swrate]

A life is more then a number, a life has faces, as you well know, writer, safety obsession.
percentages skewed of the whole, just shows how urban life is in certain cities, unsafe because of "local terrorism", crime.

[deedar]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Indeed, you are correct.

But that doesn't change the fact that your chances of being killed in Washington DC are 300% greater than being killed in Iraq....bogus, inflated, unsubstantiated death tolls aside (100K).

Bogus, unsubstantiated... says who?

risk of death by violence for civilians in Iraq is now 58 times higher than before the US-led invasion

The Lancet is quite a reputable journal. The study does indeed have a small sample size, but "bogus?" I hardly think so.

[Spliffdaddy]

Unsubstantiated, and obviously bogus.

[deedar]

Originally posted by Spliffdaddy:
Unsubstantiated, and obviously bogus.

That's right, you folks don't believe in science or the scientific method. Denial seems to suit y'all quite fine.