Friends are still sending me emails that say that the death-rate of US soldiers in Iraq isn’t all that different from the murder rate in big cities like Detroit. The implication, I guess, is that people die everywhere, so why get upset over some deaths in Iraq? Or maybe the idea is that our troops are as safe in Baghdad as Detroit.
Come on! If you need to defend our Iraq activities, put some thought into it and stop sending me this nonsensical data.
First off, if ever there was an apples -to- oranges comparison, it has to be US soldiers to Detroit civilians. Put these well-trained, well-armed and (hopefully by now) well-armored men and women in Detroit and their death rate drops to zero.
CNN says that 113 American troops died in Iraq in December 2006, 102 from hostile action. For 2006, the number of American deaths was 814. If I read this chart right, the Detroit metro area suffered about 440 murders in 2005 (the most recent year of complete data), so our men and women in Iraq are dying at twice the rate of murders in Detroit (I can’t believe I’m stooping to make this point, but that was the comparison in the email).
But the real story is the CIVILIAN causalities in Iraq. Today CBS News quotes a UN report that says that nearly 35,000 Iraqi civilians were killed last year. (I presume CBS means these people were killed in war-related violence, but shoddy reporting makes it hard to say for certain). Compare that to 16,692 murders in the US in 2005 and you have a better comparison (and remember that Iraq has less than 10% of our population).
Now I’m not saying that US troops are killing all these civilians (I don’t believe that for a minute, and I am VERY pro-troops), and I’m not saying that an immediate US withdrawal would end the violence (though I think us getting out would help - four years on, I’m pretty anti-war too).
I am saying: Quit sending me emails that downplay the deaths of our soldiers and ignore the civilian causalities. When Christians forward this nonsense, we reveal how knee jerk our political views are and how little thinking we do about Jesus, violence and our faith.
In fact, don’t send me any emails that you don’t write yourself.
7 responses so far ↓
1 JP // Jan 29, 2007 at 3:28 pm
Forwarded “Christian” emails can occasionally be moving or funny, but I’ve found 99% of the few I open to espouse and appeal to a different form of “Christianity” than I live by. I’m not sure where Jesus stands on the war in Iraq, but I’m pretty sure He wishes people would do less “forwarding” in His Name. (Which unintentionally but appropriately reminds me of Bono’s similar comment at the Grammy’s a few year’s back…remember that?)
2 jhill // Feb 6, 2007 at 10:11 am
I think that we’re killing those civilians… But what do you call a civilian? How do you know who to engage? I wish people would just SHUT UP about stuff they have no clue about!!! If you want to be a subject matter expert, o over there for yourself.
As far as what God thinks about the war… Who knows, He did put all leaders into power, and it’s all for His big picture plan. Even if we wanted to, could we really have prevented this war??? Just a thought… Please don’t respond with any God of peace and love stuff, I’ve heard it my whole life!
3 Jennifer Carr // Oct 22, 2007 at 5:44 pm
Thank you for a reasoned, humane and intelligent perspective on these kinds of mindless, obtuse and dangerous emails. It’s nice to see a Christian view from one who has read the New Testament. Rock on!
4 Jonathan // Dec 2, 2007 at 4:14 pm
How can you not know what Jesus would advocate?
“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”
He would never advocate invading a country that never attacked us. Afghanistan included, if you want to go after terrorists, you send CIA, not armies.
P.S. EVERYONE should read this Fox News report on Bush’s grandfather, the late Senator Prescott Bush, and how he was CONVICTED in 1942 of financing Hitler’s rise to power.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,100474,00.html
History does repeat. Hitlerhas reichstag fire, creates Heimat Sicherheitdienst, or “Homeland Security”.
Bush’s brother Marvin Bush was responsible for WTC security under Securacom contract, WTC fires happen, he creates Homeland Security.
*sigh* how lost the flock is today, a bunch of sheep without a shepherd.
5 Daniel // Dec 29, 2007 at 7:20 pm
I think what you’re missing is the per capita comparison. Straight number to number is one thing, but so is percentage of the population vs. percentage of population. In 2006 the Iraqi civilian death rate- admittedly WELL higher than the US soldier death rate- was 27.51 per 100,000. For the same year Washington DC had 45, Detroit had 41.8, Baltimore had 37.7, Atlanta had 34.9, and St. Louis had 31.4, all per 100,000.
Is this to say it’s not dangerous in Iraq? Obviously not, but these are the Civilian numbers that you wanted to quote, and last I checked the US is not thought of as a war zone, like Iraq is. One would expect people to be dying at a MUCH slower rate. That there is any comparison at all, I believe, is the point.
I think there would be too much instability were we to leave right now, and I personally don’t want the US’s actions to be responsible for any ensuing genocide- again, like as happened after we left Vietnam. Once we can move the bulk of our troops out, I would love to see us funnel some of the huge amounts of money we’re spending over there towards the crime situation in the us, because no matter how you spin it, I think it is at horrifying levels in some places, don’t you?
6 Karl // Jan 18, 2008 at 2:33 pm
In response to Daniel:
The Iraq per capita numbers are per day, the US numbers are per year.
I visited DC in November, and, fortunately, did not witness a single car bomb. On the other hand, the number of deaths in Iraq at the same time was tragic.
The “war” in Iraq ended in May of 2003. What we have had since is an occupation.
7 Jim Richards // Jan 24, 2008 at 9:00 am
I just happened to stumble on your web site but decided to read it a little. I just received a similar e-mail checking their numbers.
I would suggest changing your e-mail or block the sender.
Unless of course you actually like getting that stuff and are using that as an excuse to write anti war sentiments.
I personally don’t care just a casual observation, since you did a lot of research to support your stand, which will invite rebutals.
Something you say you don’t want.:)
I love the site name by the way.
Jim
Leave a Comment