You understand, I don't accept the underlying premise that a war's success or failure is based on casualty rates (another reason liberals shouldn't be allowed anywhere near defense issues).
But, just for drill, let's take a look at the numbers. What would the "proper" number be for freeing 25 million Iraqis? What percentage of 25 million is 2,000? Or 30,000? How does that compare to percentages that died in other wars to protect freedom or liberate a people?
The U.N. bailed out of Iraq the second their office was bombed. You might consider that one end of the curve.
Johnson and Nixon presided over death rates of 1,000 a month in Vietnam, and the U.S. then bailed out. That might be toward the other end.
I don't know what President Kerry would have done by now. What would his number have been?
Current Events » in reply to re: Not my decision to make.
It doesn't work that way.
The whole thread (31 posts)
- On Iraqi civilian deaths.
- To put it into perspective,...
- That number is probably close to correct.
- re: That number is probably close to correct.
- Was the Civil War worth it?
- We didn't invade ourselves.
- And you shed tears for plantation owners too I betcha. (n/t)
- As a Canadian, I have a problem with your perspectives
- "They use US deaths and Iraqis deaths only to serve their own anti-Bush political agenda."
- Interesting question.
- We didn't invade ourselves.