Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Wilso wrote:

The only point you've made is what complete sh!tholes many US cities are!

True that.

0 Replies

Wilso wrote:

The only point you've made is what complete sh!tholes many US cities are!

As compared to the entire Australian continent?

0 Replies

{Waits for Setanta to make CJ his whipping boy...}

0 Replies

BM.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
blueflame1 wrote:
"Are you telling us it is just as safe for US military personnel in Bahgdad as it would be for them in DC?" hahaha. Was he? He tried.

Have you even the article? It refers only to civilian death rates per capita.

But it is comparable to the military deaths in Iraq. it's only 300% more than the Iraqi civilian deaths which is only 300% more than the DC murder rate.

If something it comparable at 300% then it is comparable at 300%. You can't have it both ways Brandon. If you want to state that the rate of civilian deaths at 300% of the rate in DC is comparable then you have to accept that the military rate at 300% of Iraqi civilians is comparable.

So, according to your argument, it would also be true that if I call prices of $10 and $15 comparable, then I have to say that prices of $10 and $5,000 are comparable. Brilliant.

It seems simple math escapes you Brandon. .What is 300% of $10? Now what is 300% of that?

I have no idea HOW you got to $15 and $5,000 other than to try to make your case look better by ignoring the facts of what you did originally.

0 Replies

farmerman wrote:

bm, this is a joke right?

Actually, the only joke at this point is that Bernard is still trying to salvage his already destroyed argument.

0 Replies

cjhsa wrote:

Wilso wrote:
The only point you've made is what complete sh!tholes many US cities are!

As compared to the entire Australian continent?

Exactly. Most single US cities have murder rates in excess of the entire Australian continent.

0 Replies

Re: Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Brandon9000 wrote:

[size=7]Monday, May 29, 2006 1:22 p.m. EDT[/size]

Iraq Less Violent than Washington, D.C.

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.

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

Comparing Iraq (population 26.00 million to DC .55 million) is more than a bit inappropriate. Forgive me for making your eyes to glaze over. Lets's add to DC's population some contiguous states: Virginia (population of 7.55 million); North Carolina (8.69); West Virginia (1.82) and Maryland (5.60). That is a total of some 24.21 million.
There were a total of 1765 murders in the year that I found info for. That works out to a rate of 7.29/100000. The US rate, by the way, was 5.56/100000.
Johnboy's sources: Population from the US Census Bureau 2005 Estimates. Murders from the United States: Uniform Crime Report for 2004.

0 Replies

Re: Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

realjohnboy wrote:

Johnboy's sources: Population from the US Census Bureau 2005 Estimates. Murders from the United States: Uniform Crime Report for 2004.

Reality carries a well-known anti-Bush bias. Therefore it's shrill and unbalanced of you to just post unfiltered facts here. Shame on you!

(PS: Anyone know what the murder rate was in Iraq before the US invasion?)

0 Replies

parados wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
parados wrote:
Brandon9000 wrote:
blueflame1 wrote:
"Are you telling us it is just as safe for US military personnel in Bahgdad as it would be for them in DC?" hahaha. Was he? He tried.

Have you even the article? It refers only to civilian death rates per capita.

But it is comparable to the military deaths in Iraq. it's only 300% more than the Iraqi civilian deaths which is only 300% more than the DC murder rate.

If something it comparable at 300% then it is comparable at 300%. You can't have it both ways Brandon. If you want to state that the rate of civilian deaths at 300% of the rate in DC is comparable then you have to accept that the military rate at 300% of Iraqi civilians is comparable.

So, according to your argument, it would also be true that if I call prices of $10 and $15 comparable, then I have to say that prices of $10 and $5,000 are comparable. Brilliant.

It seems simple math escapes you Brandon. .What is 300% of $10? Now what is 300% of that?

I have no idea HOW you got to $15 and $5,000 other than to try to make your case look better by ignoring the facts of what you did originally.

Your argument, as I understand it, is that if I say that 3x is comparable to x, I have no choice but to say that 9x is also comparable to x.

If this was what you meant to say, then it follows that I must also say that 27x is comparable to x. And I must also say that 81x is comparable to x. Thus, it follows that by saying that $15 is comparable to $10, I am condemning myself to be forced to say that any amount, including $5,000, is comparable to $10, which is obvsiously nonsense. The fact is that I am perfectly free to say that 3x is comparable to x, and refuse to say that 9x is comparable.

0 Replies

Re: Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

realjohnboy wrote:

Comparing Iraq (population 26.00 million to DC .55 million) is more than a bit inappropriate. Forgive me for making your eyes to glaze over. Lets's add to DC's population some contiguous states: Virginia (population of 7.55 million); North Carolina (8.69); West Virginia (1.82) and Maryland (5.60). That is a total of some 24.21 million.
There were a total of 1765 murders in the year that I found info for. That works out to a rate of 7.29/100000. The US rate, by the way, was 5.56/100000.

<nods>

Another good argument.

This is like a collective deconstruction exercise..

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

The fact is that I am perfectly free to say that 3x is comparable to x, and refuse to say that 9x is comparable.

You are perfectly free to say so, but it doesn't make any sense.

Is 45% of the vote "in the same neighbourhood" as 15%?
Are 18 apples "in the same neighbourhood" as 6 apples?
Is a $6 trillion "in the same neighbourhood" as $2 trillion one?
Are some 128 violent civilian deaths (per x) "in the same neighbourhood" as some 36 ones?

The reasonable answer to all those questions is, of course, "no".

Your unwillingness to be honest about even the most basic elements of your own argument is illustrated by how you cheat when you choose your analogues. "If I call prices of $10 and $15 comparable"? No, what you were saying was that prices of $10 and $30 were comparable.

And all that is still leaving aside rjb's point that you were comparing an entire country with one of the most violent cities within a country. The fair comparison would of course have been between Washington DC and Baghdad. See to what extent those two numbers would be "in the same neighbourhood"..

0 Replies

Brandon,

3x is comparable to x
y = 3x
3y is comparable to y

I see only one "logical" conclusion from your contention that 3x is comparable to x.

You can argue it if you want. You made the argument that 300% of a number is comparable to the number.

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
The fact is that I am perfectly free to say that 3x is comparable to x, and refuse to say that 9x is comparable.

You are perfectly free to say so, but it doesn't make any sense.

Your unwillingness to be honest about even the most basic elements of your own argument is illustrated by how you cheat when you choose your analogues.

Bears repeating. And bolding. And enlarging.

0 Replies

Thomas wrote:

I am confident that one day, Brandon will learn that making a mistake and not admitting it is only hurting yourself twice.

Is this a betting kinda thing?
Cuz I'm about ready to take it.

0 Replies

Brandon9000 wrote:

The fact is that I am perfectly free to say that 3x is comparable to x, and refuse to say that 9x is comparable.

You're perfectly free to say whatever nonsense you want, Brandon.

Just don't expect people not to point out it is nonsense.

0 Replies

ehBeth wrote:

Thomas wrote:
I am confident that one day, Brandon will learn that making a mistake and not admitting it is only hurting yourself twice.

Is this a betting kinda thing?
Cuz I'm about ready to take it.

What ya betting?

Though I DID see him admit he was wrong once.

How many pages of rebuttal are we allowing here before the bet is considered won?

0 Replies

Re: Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Thomas wrote:

(PS: Anyone know what the murder rate was in Iraq before the US invasion?)

Hmmmm..... Considering Hussein would regularly win elections with more than 90% of the vote, I doubt if government statistics from Iraq would be very reliable. However, if anyone could figure out how many hundred thousand people Hussein executed in addition to other violent deaths there, one can only guess the number but we know it was very significant. How about a wild guess of 500,000 deaths over 10 years, which works out to 192 deaths per 100,000 per year. If that is even close, looks like Iraqi civilians are considerably safer now on average.

0 Replies

War atrocities: awareness grows, tolerance drops http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0602/p02s01-usmi.html

0 Replies

I only read a few sentences of the above posted article and kind of gave up on it. I think the No Gun Ri thing in Korea has been pretty much debunked for example. I would need to go back and research it to refresh my memory, but I know Parados and I debated this a while back, but anyway, can anybody find just one war in the history of mankind that does not include the loss of innocent lives? Here again this is a prime example of biased news and biased commentary.

0 Replies

Civilians Death Rate in Iraq Less Than in Washington, DC

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know