LA Homicides > Iraq Casualties? (Topic)

I wouldn't count tanks and air strikes as rifles.

None.

Quote from

DT_Battlekruser

Quote

It must be noted that this is for U.S. soldiers, not civilians

This is the key here. In LA we're talking about mostly unarmed or little-armed people getting shot up on the streets. When you compare it to the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, of course you're going to see comparable levels of blood in LA. In Iraq, we're talking heavily armed soldiers of the most advanced country in the world, and yet the still die at rates equal to the homicide rate in one of the largest counties in the country? Like you said, if you want to compare, count all non-natural Iraqi civilian deaths in a year and you will count tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths.

Very true. Doubtlessly, Iraq is in a nasty place. Some people act as if there is a blood bath among U.S. soldiers, yet I rarely here any mention (much less an outcry) of the violence in Los Angeles (I lived around there for some time). I do not think this is justified.

Indeed, there is a large number of civilian casualties, but I would conjecture that our presence is, at the moment, helping the situation. Were we to leave, the only lives that would be helped would be our own.

None.

Two things. One, the AK-47 is actually a much better weapon than a M-16. M-16s are actually quite horrible.
Second, look at the percentages, and not the numbers, and you will find that a much larger percentage of soldiers in Iraq die than people murdered in Los Angeles.

None.

Quote

Second, look at the percentages, and not the numbers, and you will find that a much larger percentage of soldiers in Iraq die than people murdered in Los Angeles.

I am not claiming the opposite, nor does it have anything to do with my point. Nobody whines about percentages. Saying "60% of all people with heart cancer die" is very different than saying "1 million people die of heart cancer every year."

None.

Quote from frazz

Quote

Second, look at the percentages, and not the numbers, and you will find that a much larger percentage of soldiers in Iraq die than people murdered in Los Angeles.

I am not claiming the opposite, nor does it have anything to do with my point. Nobody whines about percentages. Saying "60% of all people with heart cancer die" is very different than saying "1 million people die of heart cancer every year."

True. A percentage is just vague enough to make it sound heart breaking. Like the "Did you know that 100% of people that ate carrots in 1884 are dead". It sounds like alot until you look at the numbers. I hear what both sides are saying and IMO i think frazz has the stronger point. People do point out a ton of how many people die in Iraq. Well its a fricken war zone, DUH! It just goes to show that our own country has its fair share of "induced" deaths that go unnoticed from the media hype towards the war.

None.

Some good points about these figures: LA's population is roughly 4 million, and that's a lot more than the number of troops we have or have ever had in Iraq. Also, if you take into account Iraqi fatalities, then obviously a lot more people die in Iraq.

None.

Quote from

Sael

Some good points about these figures: LA's population is roughly 4 million, and that's a lot more than the number of troops we have or have ever had in Iraq.

This has already been pointed out and discussed. Please read the topic.

Quote

Also, if you take into account Iraqi fatalities, then obviously a lot more people die in Iraq.

As I pointed out in the first post.

None.

Quote from frazz

Quote from

DT_Battlekruser

Quote

It must be noted that this is for U.S. soldiers, not civilians

This is the key here. In LA we're talking about mostly unarmed or little-armed people getting shot up on the streets. When you compare it to the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, of course you're going to see comparable levels of blood in LA. In Iraq, we're talking heavily armed soldiers of the most advanced country in the world, and yet the still die at rates equal to the homicide rate in one of the largest counties in the country? Like you said, if you want to compare, count all non-natural Iraqi civilian deaths in a year and you will count tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths.

Very true. Doubtlessly, Iraq is in a nasty place. Some people act as if there is a blood bath among U.S. soldiers, yet I rarely here any mention (much less an outcry) of the violence in Los Angeles (I lived around there for some time). I do not think this is justified.

Indeed, there is a large number of civilian casualties, but I would conjecture that our presence is, at the moment, helping the situation. Were we to leave, the only lives that would be helped would be our own.

I live in LA County, anytime a homicide occurs, its on the news within hours.

None.

Quote from

WoAHorde

Quote from frazz

Quote from

DT_Battlekruser

Quote

It must be noted that this is for U.S. soldiers, not civilians

This is the key here. In LA we're talking about mostly unarmed or little-armed people getting shot up on the streets. When you compare it to the deaths of U.S. soldiers in Iraq, of course you're going to see comparable levels of blood in LA. In Iraq, we're talking heavily armed soldiers of the most advanced country in the world, and yet the still die at rates equal to the homicide rate in one of the largest counties in the country? Like you said, if you want to compare, count all non-natural Iraqi civilian deaths in a year and you will count tens of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of deaths.

Very true. Doubtlessly, Iraq is in a nasty place. Some people act as if there is a blood bath among U.S. soldiers, yet I rarely here any mention (much less an outcry) of the violence in Los Angeles (I lived around there for some time). I do not think this is justified.

Indeed, there is a large number of civilian casualties, but I would conjecture that our presence is, at the moment, helping the situation. Were we to leave, the only lives that would be helped would be our own.

I live in LA County, anytime a homicide occurs, its on the news within hours.

He wasn't talking about local news.

None.

Quote

It must be noted that this is for U.S. soldiers, not civilians (that is more in the tens of thousands). However, it seems unlikely that such casualties would go down significantly with our absence.

I'd say that having 0 US troops in Iraq would equal 0 US troop casualties in Iraq, but you disagree (unless you meant that "such casualties" referred to all casualties, in which case you should have kept it in parentheses). I think we can all agree that LA might not be the most peaceful of towns in the world, but Iraq is undoubtedly a good bit worse. With that in mind, what exactly are we talking about in this topic? You see frazz, I did read the topic and just pointed out what I thought to be the most pertinent information to be found in this entire topic. It's really just beating a dead horse to continue on and on after the question at hand has been answered, but some people do try too hard to sound as if they have something worth saying.

None.

I was indeed talking about civilian casualties, Sael.

My point is that not very many soldiers are dieing in Iraq. That's not to say it isn't violent, of course not. You can read my early conclusions in the first post.

None.

Well I think Frazz is just trying to say "we" * have worse Domestic Problems. With the arguement that you should count civilians in Iraq though, I don't know. But then again whats the homicides across the whole US?

*(I'm canadian but hey... US stuff sometimes affects Canadians more than stuff that happens to Canada lol)

Post has been edited 2 time(s), last time on Jun 4 2008, 5:09 pm by Tank_7.

None.

Most protesters I see protesting the war say things along the lines of "Save the troops!', not "Save the Iraqi civilians!"
Of course, if they said then they'd have to show that our presence is worse for Iraqi civilians, which is very counterintuitive.

None.