Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Elroy who wrote (288223)	5/16/2006 10:38:13 AM
From: combjelly	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573830

"The United States gets on average 30,000 car crash related deaths a year (out of a 300 million population). " Aaahhh, brings back memories. During Vietnam, it was pointed out that the troops were in greater danger back home than they were deployed in Vietnam, cars being deadlier back then than they are now. Of course, this totally ignores the people who are permanently crippled and maimed. Both physically and psychologically. That number is at a minimum 10 times larger.

To: Elroy who wrote (288223)	5/16/2006 10:49:16 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573830

2,443 in three years? So if we assume there are ~140,000 US troops in Iraq at any given time the odds of dying in Iraq are 814/140,000 = ~0.58% per year. The United States gets on average 30,000 car crash related deaths a year (out of a 300 million population). First it should be needless to point out the idiocy of your comparison, but then to play your stupid game, the death ratio of Americans is an order of magnitude greater in Iraq than using your silly figures, which of course ignore the inherent danger of serving there, the severe injuries that are not even reported, and the phsycological scarring that is becoming evident as our soldiers return home, just as it did in Vietnam, and last but not least, adding in the death of Iraqis, which is said to number in the multiple 10s of thousands....have you no shame to compare accidental death to that which comes from deliberate, chosen violence? Al

To: Elroy who wrote (288223)	5/16/2006 5:07:51 PM
From: Taro	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573830

Good math, Elroy. Now no doubt a bunch of posters will attack you for your correct maths but still, however, you put the beef in perspective. Thanks a lot for that. The rest is (press) silence. Taro

To: Elroy who wrote (288223)	5/16/2006 5:14:27 PM
From: TigerPaw	Respond to of 1573830

if we assume there are ~140,000 US troops in Iraq at any given time Of course the odds of those in the rear with the gear are different from those in the humvees. Much fewer than 140,000 are regularly exposed to the dangers. TP

To: Elroy who wrote (288223)	5/19/2006 8:46:36 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1573830

So being stationed in Iraq is ~3x more life threatening than driving to work in the US. Put that way, Iraq doesn't seem that dangerous. I know you can be crass and a butthead, but I never thought you were this stupid. I am going to assume that Arab censorship has kept you uninformed about the numbers of soldiers stationed in Iraq coming back injured and the nature of those injuries; that you also are unaware of how many are diagnosed with PTSD and how that makes living a life back in the US very difficult. However, I suspect even if you did know your response would have been modified only slightly........given how you represent yourself on this thread.