Were you aware that in 2008 Iraq's death rate was lower than the US?

no, I didn't realize that. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

?? nicely, I grant you with this, you researched your question. So I definately appreciate you for dealing with the hassle. and that i checked for accuracy (on a number of it, no longer all) too. sturdy pastime!! I surely have a pair topics with this even if. a million. you're comparing apples and oranges. each warfare is different. Our WWII losses would have doubled if we did not drop the bombs. ought to we evaluate doing that now, as Nixon apparently did throughout Vietnam? 2. keep in mind "challenge carried out"? replaced into that the end of the warfare? Technically, we are no longer in a warfare at present. perchance it truly is why the dems are disappointed. what's the challenge in Iraq? First it replaced into WMD's. Then even as that grew to change into out to be a bald-confronted lie, we shifted to "isn't it extra positive now that Saddam isn't in skill?". After that, it replaced into "we favor to grant stability until eventually a authorities is formed". All that has been achieved. So, what's next? what's the challenge? Oh, now we ought to attend until eventually the Iraqi military is as a lot as pastime. BTW, keep in mind how Rumsfield demanded that the Iraq military be disbanded? would it not no longer were extra positive to save them in service? 3. have you ever requested the mamma and papa of #2,582 on your stat sheet about how they sense? you're lacking the finished factor of the talk via specializing in "deaths", and showing us that it purely isn't that undesirable. the point is, we are stuck, a useless ringer for Vietnam and Korea. even as are the troops coming living house? We nevertheless save 30,000 plus (i imagine, be at liberty to acceptable me if i'm incorrect) in South Korea. yet our troops in Korea are not demise. Iraq troops are. And, the democrats ask, WHY? It has no longer some thing to do with death expenses, yet why we are over there, what's the challenge?

It is not clear exactly what these statistics mean. The US has a generally older population, so there will be more deaths from old age.

US population 65 and older: 12.6%

Iraq population 65 and older: 3%

A more telling statistic might be death rate by violent means. I haven't found anything for that yet and now my wife is bugging me for dinner. Maybe someone else can do some more research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_U...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Iraq#...

As of February 2009 the U.S, population is 306 million :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_U...

As of 2008 the population of Iraq is barely 31 million :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq

At more than 10 times the population than Iraq,

the U.S. has barely 3.12 more death's per 1,000 than

Iraq at the 5.14 rate you originally quote for Iraq.

And only 2.23 more deaths per 1,000 at the 6.4 rate

for Iraq that you ammended your figure to.

Either way, it still puts living in the U.S. at a far

greater advantage to dieing in Iraq...any old way

you want to try and add it up.

Libs don't want to hear numbers like that they just want to hear change you can believe in, and yes we can, and socialized health care, and more taxes, and the war in Iraq and Afghanistan is failing and that our imperial troops are dying by the thousands it would really get them angry if you posted how many of those deaths were accidental or natural causes.

Someone wanted to see Iraq's (positive) population growth. Here's some data starting in 2000.

http://www.indexmundi.com/g/g.aspx?v=21&c=iz&l=en

But is that rating due to the presence of US troops in Iraq or the fact that Iraqi police and military are managing most of the security missions in the country now?

Some people skate to where the puck is, others skate to where the puck is going.

Our Iraq involvement was among the dumbest stunts pulled by Bush/Cheney. Why? Baathist Iraq was a buffer between the civilized world and Shia Iran. When numbnutz got rid of SH he got rid of the buffer. Iraq is majority Shia. What do you suppose will happen when we leave? I'm guessing Shia Iraq will cooperate with Shia Iran and cause a world of pain for the west.

You may want to mention the above when discussing our "victory" in Iraq with your neocon buddies.

The puck is going to be in a world of hurt and guess who is going to have to skate into harm's way, again?

I imagine these statistics will be affected a bit by the car bomb attack today in Baghdad that killed 37 Iraqis and wounded over 100.

Yeah, that violence is down.

How many armed soldiers patrolling the streets per capita there? That might have something to do with it.

Your own source disagrees with you. The rate in Iraq is 9.1 vs 8.2 in the US.

All you have to do is turn on the TV every morning and see all the murders committed last night , usually by kids growing up without a father in the house . ( check it out )