*Not really a fan of that site, because it fairly bias...but I found it an interesting comparison. I believe 2005 is higher than that. So, should we plan a pull-out of California...lol? *Since I peaked at that one, I found a city that scarly comparable...Washington DC, which has a higher death rate. Second article in next post. And look at Detroit,...wow that must be a fun place to live. State lost 2,394 to murder in 2004 compared to 905 coalition lives http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=47680 Recently released crime statistics show the homicide rate in California is 265 percent higher than the death rate suffered by U.S. and British military personnel in Iraq. According to the report "Crime in California 2004," compiled by California Attorney General Bill Lockyer, there were 2,394 reported homicides in the Golden State last year. That compares with 905 deaths of coalition forces in Iraq, chiefly Americans and Brits, during the same time period. A monthly average of 75 deaths of American and British forces has remained fairly constant over the last two years. The peak for homicides in California was in 1993, when there were 4,095 reported. Such comparisons have been made by defenders of the action in Iraq, who say the number of casualties for a war of this length are extraordinarily low. Opponents of the war claim the lives of the 2,000 Americans who have died since the initial invasion have been lost in vain. Opined Toula Foscolos in the French Le Magazine: "More than 2,000 Americans have left their lives [in Iraq], thanks to the conniving and self-serving ways of their dim-witted president."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/5/29/132706.shtml Despite media coverage purporting to show that escalating violence in Iraq has the country spiraling out of control, civilian death statistics complied by Rep. Steve King, R-IA, indicate that Iraq actually has a lower civilian violent death rate than Washington, D.C. Appearing with Westwood One radio host Monica Crowley on Saturday, King said that the incessantly negative coverage of the Iraq war prompted him to research the actual death numbers. "I began to ask myself the question, if you were a civilian in Iraq, how could you tolerate that level of violence," he said. "What really is the level of violence?" Using Pentagon statistics cross-checked with independent research, King said he came up with an annualized Iraqi civilian death rate of 27.51 per 100,000. Story Continues Below While that number sounds high - astonishingly, the Iowa Republican discovered that it's significantly lower than a number of major American cities, including the nation's capital. "It's 45 violent deaths per 100,000 in Washington, D.C.," King told Crowley. Other American cities with higher violent civilian death rates than Iraq include: # Detroit - 41.8 per 100,000 # Baltimore - 37.7 per 100,000 # Atlanta - 34.9 per 100,000 # St. Louis - 31.4 per 100,000 The American city with the highest civilian death rate was New Orleans before Katrina - with a staggering 53.1 deaths per 100,000 - almost twice the death rate in Iraq.
Rick.. you're only comparing OUR military losses... you're forgetting the 100+ IRAQIS who are being murderred every single day.
Some other interesting facts. The death toll for military during peace time under Jimmy Carter was higher in one year, than three years combined in Iraq.
By the terrorists that you love to support. and yo, we all know you wish more american troops would die; so don't feign any outrage (or concern) here.
That newmax article is also comparing cities with the worst neighborhoods to entire country that has , more peaceful rural areas um not severla hundred thousand actually "gased" , its like 10,000 or something Also who decided to not do anything about the gas attacks at the time Ronnie Regan was against doing anything to Saddam for gasing the people and we sold him the hardware to do the gasing http://www.casi.org.uk/info/usdocs/usiraq80s90s.html and we kept selling him guns up till the day he invade Kuwait
The second post is a bit different. I understand (for the first one),...it's just an interesting stat. The second compares how safe our cities are compared to Iraq in general. Most of Iraq is a decent place to live....I'd say there's only key areas of extreme conflict. But honestly, I'd say most ghettos in America are as harsh or worse than Iraq at times.
I would say you havn't been to too many ghettos, most ghettos in the US are pretty harmless unless you are invloved with drugs.
Pretty true. Most all of the murders in ghettos are criminals (gangsters/dealers) fighting with each other. When I was on my road trip driving across the country I had to stop for gas through just about every major city I ran into... of course not knowing what part of town is good or not, I just exit the freeway and landed in some pretty run down areas... in little rock I even stopped and asked a few guys how far it was to Memphis . Once again rick.. you have to compare ALL the murders in iraq if you're going to use ALL the murders of some other city... not just military. It makes the entire stat skewed and useless.
I've worked with my father at some, actually. Yeah, but your right, drugs are more or less the reasoning...often. Although some people in ghettos will shoot each other just because they gave a bad look. One of my father's coworkers was black dude, and he got killed. They don't really mess around with you if your asian or white... I guess some of them think your a cop. Hostage situations and so forth...but again, mostly pertaining to drugs. But I'd say long-term, I'd probably rather be in Iraq than some of the place I helped my father...he had a few close calls.
The second post does pertain to civilians, although probably not our forces as well; but considering everything, a lot more of them are dying than use...mostly their police force, and citizens.
If you or your father went to bagdad and couldn't pass yourself of as local, and didn't have an armed escort I think you would be killed within 24 hours
well I don't think there is anywhere in the US where that is true, so saying that you would rather be in Iraq then oakland or somewhere is dumb