Los Angeles more deadly than Iraq for returning soldier

[smallprint]

I read this story in the LATimes:


Returning Sailor Killed in Gardena

A sailor who had just returned from active duty in the war in Iraq was shot dead early today outside a nightclub along with a friend by two suspects who fired up to 30 rounds.

Brian Keith Butler, 25, was a hero on his block in a modest section of Gardena, a onetime Gardena High School basketball star who, according to family and friends, joined the Navy so that he could see the world.

Butler returned from a two-year tour of duty on a destroyer in the Persian Gulf this month and was scheduled to ship off again in June.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x582428


Then I did a little math:

In the 3 month period of Jan-Mar 2004:
US Soldiers killed in Iraq: 119
Homicides in Los Angeles: 126

sources:
http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx
http://www.jointogether.org/gv/news/summaries/reader/0,2061,570272,00.html



I know Rummy said something idiotic last year about Iraq being safer than DC...of course he was justifying the violence, not condemning it. But it is a serious point. Maybe the anti-war movement should start focusing more attention on what's going on in this country-- there is so much violence here... and we can do so much more about the violence in our own backyard than we can about the fighting on the other side of the world... just my thoughts.

[bpilgrim]

1. don't forget to calculate the RATIO

which you get by factoring in the POPULATION of both.

don't buy the RW kool-aid...

also, the anti-WAR movment is BUSY right now.

peace

[smallprint]

2. I understand it's not a statistically proportionate comparison

and I'm not by any stretch of the imagination drinking RW kool-aid-- this is just something I noticed on my own.

The fact of the matter is that a soldier spent 2 years in a war zone, came home, and was shot dead, and no one is surprised.

This is messed up...

I agree the anti-war movement is busy... but how many bodies need to pile up here before we pay some more attention?

Just frustrated, I guess...

peace

[bpilgrim]

7. k

and it is tragic what you posted but i have heard this argument from the right and they always spin it as if it is more DANGEROUS here and it isn't by a long shot.

remember the left has ALWAYS been speaking up and working for the downtroden it is the media that hasn't been pay'n attention.

'the only thing new in this world is the history you don't know'
Truman

:hi:

peace

[BeatleBoot]

3. Brit Hume, is that you?

:hurts:

Lol!!

[smallprint]

4. Hmmm... not exactly

I assume this looks like some kind of Faux news talking point, but it's not (I don't even have a TV for chrissakes.)

I'm not diminishing the war. I'm trying to say, look what the hell is going on HERE too.

Sorry if it came out wrong.

[troublemaker]

5. If Iraq was Los Angeles the KIA figure would

be much higher because it would include Iraqis.

I don't doubt 800 Los Angelenos have died violently during this war but I'm confident 10,000+ haven't died violently.

[smallprint]

6. Good point

And you can add about another 10,000-15,000 Iraqi soldiers to the 10,000 Iraqi civilian deaths.

But in terms of Americans dying the numbers are in the same ballpark.

[bpilgrim]

8. the numbers are NOT in the 'same ballpark'

i thought you said you 'got that' above?

peace

[smallprint]

10. I meant the raw numbers, not the ratios

In the city of Los Angeles and in Iraq the numbers of Americans killed were about equal. Obviously the proportions are nowhere near the same.

And I'm not talking about wounded, which are extremely high (11000+), as we all know.

The purpose of my original post was not to imply that the death and devastation in Iraq was small-- it was to point out how HIGH the numbers are here.

How can we bring the antiwar movement and people working against violence in the inner cities together? That is the important question to me.

[ContinentalOp]

9. Here are some more numbers to chew on...

There are currently about 130,000 troops in Iraq plus several thousand civilian contractors (lets say 5000 at the very least). So that's 135,000 Americans employed in Iraq give or take a few "unemployed" civilians such as Berg wandering around. That's pretty much a 0% unemployment rate among Americans in Iraq.

In stark contrast, California had a 6.2% unemployment rate in April (http://www.edd.ca.gov/urate200405.htm). Clearly Californians would be better off in the booming economic climate of Iraq.

Shouldn't those pinko anti-war protestors be focusing their energy on more positive projects like job retraining for all of the lazy unemployed slobs of California?

[mandyky]

11. Bush's tax cuts have

caused the reduction in police forces. In Lexington, they are having trouble giving police and firemen decent healthcare and benefits, and many move to places that are more competitive.

[Columbia]

12. To be fair

This guy was a sailor on a ship in the Persian Gulf and not a soldier serving on the lines in the deserts of Iraq, so the comparison is a little faulty.

Fair winds and following seas, Sailor. Rest in peace.

[seabeyond]

13. if taking death of whole population of l.a.

then you take all the deaths of the whole population of baghdad. not just the soldiers. you cant tell me that only a 116 people died in baghdad in the same period of time.