|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 12:52:16 [Permalink]
|
Bill wrote: Then you support the media giving a proportionately equal amount of attention to Iraqi civilian deaths? And the deaths (natural or otherwise) of teachers, janitors, plumbers, clerks, electricians, engineers, scientists, etc.?
I'm just sick of this worship of the military. We have a volunteer military. They choose to risk their lives, unlike civilian victims of war who are forced to give up their lives. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
 |
|
|
bngbuck
SFN Addict
USA
2437 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 13:40:58 [Permalink]
|
Bill scott.....
I have not been a member of SFN nearly as long as most of the members commenting here in your thread. I comment only on what you have stated or asked here in thread. You said in your OP.....| Do these figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr. Clinton's presidency; when America wasn't even involved in a war? |
and | many of our Media and Politicians will pick and choose. They present only those "facts" which support their agenda-driven reporting. Why do so many of them march in lock-step to twist the truth. Where do so many of them get their marching-orders for their agenda? |
Dave shows that:| There was a total of one (1, uno) death due to hostile action during the Clinton years. There were a total of 2,596 deaths due to hostile action during the first six years of Bush's reign. |
Mr. Scott, please answer two questions:
1. How is it that you can ask such disingenuous questions, quoting from patently false representation of figures (whose E-mail source you did not state) which you did not even check, and then have the stupidity to supply the very figures that make a fool out of you, to this forum? Can you say something to me to change the impression I have of you as an ignorant, stupid man, not worthy of listening to or engaging in discourse with?
2. Can you admit your egregious error and hypocrisy in presenting these falsified figures and attempting to use them as a political argument of the very nature that you roundly condemn? Can you state clearly, "the figures I presented were falsified and I should have done the math, compared the actual figures to the ones I received in the E-mail, and either presented the true figures or not commented at all"? Otherwise, you look like a damn fool!
I state that you must be a very dishonest person if you cannot or do not attempt to respond to these two questions!
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
 Posted - 02/27/2008 : 13:44:30 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
A death is a death, no? Is a non-hostile death any less of an honor or sacrifice? |
Let's see, is a soldier's suicide less of an honor than to be shot by an enemy while defending Freedom? Is getting hit by a bus while on R&R less of a sacrifice? You tell me.| Again, my perception, based on what I saw from the media, was that military deaths were highly disproportioned in the GWB reign then in the previous 4 administrations. |
Those killed in action by enemy forces are highly disproportionate for W. than for the previous four administrations, because those other four were pretty careful to keep the foot soldiers out of harm's way.| I was surprised to see the real numbers were as close as they were between Clinton and Bush, considering we are occupying two hostile countries, while Clinton's perception was that of a peace time prez. |
With only one death due to hostile action, Clinton was a peace-time President. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 14:22:31 [Permalink]
|
| Originally posted by Dave W. |
| Let's see, is a soldier's suicide less of an honor than to be shot by an enemy while defending Freedom? |
I am not sure on the honor thing but it would be as equally unfortunate.
| Is getting hit by a bus while on R&R less of a sacrifice? You tell me. |
Less of a sacrifice, maybe? But not any more or less unfortunate.
| Those killed in action by enemy forces are highly disproportionate for W. than for the previous four administrations, |
I would expect so.
| because those other four were pretty careful to keep the foot soldiers out of harm's way. |
Yes, they were very noble men.
| With only one death due to hostile action, Clinton was a peace-time President. |
Again, which is why I was surprised to see service deaths under Clinton to be as high as they were. |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Bill scott
SFN Addict
USA
2103 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 14:24:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by bngbuck
Bill scott.....
I have not been a member of SFN nearly as long as most of the members commenting here in your thread. I comment only on what you have stated or asked here in thread. You said in your OP.....| Do these figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Mr. Clinton's presidency; when America wasn't even involved in a war? |
and | many of our Media and Politicians will pick and choose. They present only those "facts" which support their agenda-driven reporting. Why do so many of them march in lock-step to twist the truth. Where do so many of them get their marching-orders for their agenda? |
Dave shows that:| There was a total of one (1, uno) death due to hostile action during the Clinton years. There were a total of 2,596 deaths due to hostile action during the first six years of Bush's reign. |
Mr. Scott, please answer two questions:
1. How is it that you can ask such disingenuous questions, quoting from patently false representation of figures (whose E-mail source you did not state) which you did not even check, and then have the stupidity to supply the very figures that make a fool out of you, to this forum? Can you say something to me to change the impression I have of you as an ignorant, stupid man, not worthy of listening to or engaging in discourse with?
2. Can you admit your egregious error and hypocrisy in presenting these falsified figures and attempting to use them as a political argument of the very nature that you roundly condemn? Can you state clearly, "the figures I presented were falsified and I should have done the math, compared the actual figures to the ones I received in the E-mail, and either presented the true figures or not commented at all"? Otherwise, you look like a damn fool!
I state that you must be a very dishonest person if you cannot or do not attempt to respond to these two questions!
|
Ok Mr. buck, you need to go have a nice stiff drink and calm down. That blood vessel in your forehead is about to explode. Take a pill as well! Go spend some time with your wife. Something.... |
"Lets get one thing clear, Bill. Science does make some assumptions." -perrodetokio-
"In the end as skeptics we must realize that there is no real knowledge, there is only what is most reasonable to believe." -Coelacanth-
The fact that humans do science is what causes errors in science. -Dave W.-
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 14:28:57 [Permalink]
|
Here's another way to look at the data ("Unknown" is the total of "Pending" and "Undetermined"):
President | Carter | Reagan | Bush Sr | Clinton | W. Bush | Dems | Reps
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Years | 1 | 8 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 9 | 18
All Deaths | 2392 | 17201 | 6223 | 7500 | 8792 | 9892 | 32216
Deaths/Year| 2392 | 2150 | 1556 | 938 | 1465 | 1099 | 1790
Accidental | 65.05% | 61.93% | 56.03% | 52.71% | 35.54% | 55.69% | 53.59%
Hostile | 0.00% | 0.34% | 2.73% | 0.01% | 29.53% | 0.01% | 8.77%
Homicide | 7.27% | 5.00% | 5.19% | 5.83% | 2.97% | 6.18% | 4.48%
Illness | 17.52% | 18.30% | 18.17% | 18.67% | 15.22% | 18.39% | 17.43%
Suicide | 9.66% | 11.78% | 15.27% | 20.29% | 10.92% | 17.72% | 12.22%
Terror | 0.04% | 1.70% | 0.03% | 1.00% | 0.63% | 0.77% | 1.09%
Unknown | 0.46% | 0.95% | 2.09% | 1.63% | 5.20% | 1.34% | 2.33% |
Clearly, if you want to die in combat, enlist now while W is still in office.
Of course, with W's huge killed-in-action figure (and his large yet-to-be-determined figures), his other numbers are all skewed. Let's leave those out, along with the deaths from terrorism:
President | Carter | Reagan | Bush Sr | Clinton | W. Bush | Dems | Reps
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Data Years | 1 | 8 | 4 | 8 | 6 | 9 | 18
All Deaths | 2380 | 16686 | 5921 | 7302 | 5684 | 9682 | 28291
Deaths/Year| 2380 | 2086 | 1480 | 913 | 947 | 1076 | 1572
Accidental | 65.38% | 63.84% | 58.89% | 54.14% | 54.98% | 56.90% | 61.02%
Homicide | 7.31% | 5.15% | 5.46% | 5.98% | 4.59% | 6.31% | 5.10%
Illness | 17.61% | 18.86% | 19.10% | 19.17% | 23.54% | 18.79% | 19.85%
Suicide | 9.71% | 12.15% | 16.04% | 20.84% | 16.89% | 18.11% | 13.92% |
So if you'd prefer to have a runaway tank squish you, or someone murder you, you should have served under Carter (not that a single year of data is really fair to him). If you'd prefer to get sick and croak, W is your man. And if you'd like to sign up and then shoot yourself, that's what you need a "peacetime President" for. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 14:55:35 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
Originally posted by moakley
I believe that you also need to consider combat survival rates.
For soldiers injured in combat today, the survival rate is 90 percent or higher--a significant improvement even since the Gulf War in the early 1990s, according to Col. W. Bryan Gamble, M.D., Commander of Landstuhl Regional Medical Center in Germany.
|
|
Interesting. I read this morning and was a litte freaked out. Dude, it's just like what they said it would in the 1984 smash hit "The Terminator."
http://tinyurl.com/38ffzc
|
The Terminator have already been discussed:
http://www.skepticfriends.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8959
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 15:03:04 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
... I was shocked to see the actual numbers, considering we are occupying two foreign countries in very hostile conditions. |
Considering how "few" American soldiers you have in Afghanistan, calling it an occupation is quite a stretch of imagination. You have barely occupied Iraq.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 15:25:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Bill scott
A death is a death, no? Is a non-hostile death any less of an honor or sacrifice? |
It's a F-ing waste either way.
A hostile death because a moron ordered you to go somewhere to secure the moron's interest in oil, where's the honor in that?
The number of deaths during the Clinton era... with one hostile death, means that the rest of the deaths were due to suicide, your comrade-in-arms having butterfingers while handling the gun with live ammo, the poor aviator parking his plane into the gas-truck behind which a platoon is having excercises. Did they count the homocide where the soldier in uniform at the local bar managed to piss off the biker gang while on leave?
Where's the honor in being run over by a bandwagon during training?
Again, my perception, based on what I saw from the media, was that military deaths were highly disproportioned in the GWB reign then in the previous 4 administrations.
|
Deaths are highly disproportional in the GWB reign, when you look at where the soldiers are killed, and the reason they die.
If an average of 800 people are killed every year (from -96 and forward) because they were prone to get themselves killed by accident anyway, you still have a few thousand soldiers during Bush who were killed because Bush was criminally dumb enough to send them to Iraq.
I was surprised to see the real numbers were as close as they were between Clinton and Bush, considering we are occupying two hostile countries, while Clinton's perception was that of a peace time prez.
|
You already said so. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 15:26:51 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
Originally posted by Bill scott
... I was shocked to see the actual numbers, considering we are occupying two foreign countries in very hostile conditions. |
Considering how "few" American soldiers you have in Afghanistan, calling it an occupation is quite a stretch of imagination. You have barely occupied Iraq. |
What would you call it, Mab? I'd say that if you invade a country of ca. 27 million, overthrow its government, and maintain troop levels of ca. 130,000 calling it an "occupation" isn't such a stretch.
Not that I think any of those actions are wise! But since I refuse to call it a "war" I am at a loss for a better term for what we're doing there. Occupation seems to fit, but I'm open to something else. |
|
|
|
emsby
Skeptic Friend
76 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 15:31:19 [Permalink]
|
Ok Mr. buck, you need to go have a nice stiff drink and calm down. That blood vessel in your forehead is about to explode. Take a pill as well! Go spend some time with your wife. Something....
|
I must say that like bngbuck I'm fairly new here. But I've been following this thread with interest. And I would love for you to actually address the questions asked rather than make some silly, immature remark about someone spending time with his wife. Can you admit your error or not? |
Tongue-tied and twisted, just an earthbound misfit, I. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 15:44:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
What would you call it, Mab? I'd say that if you invade a country of ca. 27 million, overthrow its government, and maintain troop levels of ca. 130,000 calling it an "occupation" isn't such a stretch. |
According to the Geneva Convention, an occupying nation is responsible for the internal security of the invaded country. Given what it looks like in Iraq, I don't feel that America have fulfilled its obligation as an occupying force.
Not that I think any of those actions are wise! But since I refuse to call it a "war" I am at a loss for a better term for what we're doing there. Occupation seems to fit, but I'm open to something else.
|
Fool's Errand comes to mind, for starters. It goes downhill from there...
Personally, I think that the invasion of Iraq was/is a crime against humanity, considering the number of civilian deaths so far.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Pelayo
Skeptic Friend
USA
70 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 16:05:26 [Permalink]
|
| The military recognizes the differences in they way someone dies or is wounded. If it is not an injury or death from enemy action, a Purple Heart is not awarded. |
I have a habit of posting without reading all previous comments, if I am repeating someone, well, excuse me, please.
"No tendency is quite so strong in human nature as the desire to lay down rules of conduct for other people." - William Howard Taft
"God ran out of new souls a long time ago and has been recycling jackasses." - Anon |
|
|
|
Chippewa
SFN Regular
USA
1496 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 16:38:10 [Permalink]
|
I support cowardice, as outlined in this dramatic scene from "The Americanization of Emily."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12V_2hKh5ro
Paddy Chayefsky was brilliant!
. |
Diversity, independence, innovation and imagination are progressive concepts ultimately alien to the conservative mind.
"TAX AND SPEND" IS GOOD! (TAX: Wealthy corporations who won't go poor even after taxes. SPEND: On public works programs, education, the environment, improvements.) |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 02/27/2008 : 17:08:32 [Permalink]
|
"What did you arrange?"
"Usually I arranged girls, but individual tastes varied, of course."
Do mine ears deceive me, or was that a fairly overt reference to homosexuality? Didn't think they mentioned that sort of thing back in the black-and-white days of cinema.
Good clip, Chippewa, thanks for posting it.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Subject: MILITARY DEATHS FOR TWENTY SIX YEARS
