ProSense
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-29-06 02:34 PM
Original message |
| Two days to go in December, and it's already the deadliest month of 2006 |
|
U.S. troop fatalities: Dec. 06 - 107 Oct 06 - 106 Casualty rate: Mar. 03 - 7.67 Apr. 04 - 4.67 Dec. 06 - 3.79Nov. 03 - 3.67 Oct. 06 - 3.55 icasualties.org
|
Monkeyman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-29-06 02:43 PM
Response to Original message |
| 1. And if they kill Saddam before the New Year |
|
All hell is going to break out in the Arab world
|
ChairmanAgnostic
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-29-06 02:48 PM
Response to Original message |
| 2. anyone else think that the new year will come in with a bang? |
|
Damn you, George. Damn you.
|
Journeyman
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-29-06 03:34 PM
Response to Original message |
| 3. You're numbers are skewed. . . |
|
You use the fatality number for US soldiers but the casualty rate for the Coalition.
The US casualty rate in 10-06 was 3.41, in 11-03 it was 2.73, 04-04 was 4.5, and 03-03 it was 5.42. This month, it's presently 3.68.
A minor quibble to some, but I personally prefer to hold President Bush totally responsible for the entire mess he's created, so I cite Coalition casualties more than just those of the US. From this, we know the death toll surpassed that of the 11-2001 attacks some three months ago, and the total is currently at 3,246. Unlike Mr Bush, and the majority in the news media, I never forget Poland or the rest of the Coalition, especially when it seems more expedient to do so.
|
ProSense
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Dec-29-06 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
|
December is the third deadliest month either way. Also, I didn't intend it to reflect U.S. casualty rate (that's why it doesn't say U.S.) since it's not broken out that way at the link. The data at the link makes it clear.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Sun May 26th 2013, 12:39 AM
Response to Original message |