Baghdad or Philadelphia

From the email bag...

Mr. White

Do you have statistics on US casualties in

Baghdad

for year to date?

Thank You

My answer...

Total Hostile - 114
Non Hostile - 15
Detail
Hostile - helicopter crash 2
Hostile - helicopter crash (missile attack) 2
Hostile - hostile fire - bomb 1
Hostile - hostile fire - car bomb 1
Hostile - hostile fire - IED attack 92
Hostile - hostile fire - mortar attack 1
Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire 10
Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire, grenades 1
Hostile - hostile fire - small arms fire, IED 4
Non-hostile 4
Non-hostile - gun shot wound 1
Non-hostile - illness 1
Non-hostile - ordnance accident 1
Non-hostile - unspecified cause 2
Non-hostile - unspecified injury 2
Non-hostile - vehicle accident 1
Non-hostile - weapon discharge 2
Non-hostile - weapon discharge (accid.)

His reply (note, nobody calls me Mike)...

Mike
Thank You

http://www.icasualties.org/oif/
http://www.philly.com/mld/philly/15397527.htm

Most Dangerous City?
Troubling Statistic  Americans killed by hostile action in Baghdad year
to date 114
                       Americans killed by hostile action in Phila PA
year to date 258

My reply....

You forgot a crucial part of the equation - the citizens who inhabit the city of Baghdad. Our estimate of Baghdad deaths for the year (and it's a conservative estimate) totals 2970 civilians and 310 Iraqi security personnel.

So let's recap - at least 3394 deaths vs. 258.

That's 114 Americans in armored vehicles, flak jackets and Kevlar helmets. How many of the deaths in Philla PA match that description?

Comments

[pastor maker]

Don't forget,

Iraqis don't count, even though it's their city.

[superpower=corruptempire]

Sleepwalking Americans have no sense of proportion-- literally. Like a word isolated from any meaningful sentence, any single number is meaningless and misleading without its full and fair statistical context.

Your email correspondent says that 258 Philadelphian civilians were killed "by hostile action" (meaning mundane "murder" rather than killed by air or artillery strikes or exploding car bombs or IEDs or US military sniper fire or following too closely behind heavily armed and armored military convoys on Philadelphian streets) so far in 2006? OK. Since the year 2006 is two-thirds over, let's project the annual Philadelphian civilian murder number to 258 x 1.5 = 387.

Basic context: What is the population of Philadelphia? US Census for year 2000 tells us 1,517,550 persons.

http://philadelphia.areaconnect.com/statistics.htm

What percentage of Philadelphia's total population does 387 represent? 387/1,517,550 = 0.0255016309%

Now, US military servicepersons killed in Baghdad so far in year 2006 = 114. 114 x 1.5 = 171 projected 2006 total?

Out of how many US military servicepersons stationed in Baghdad? Hard to say. About 140,000 total in Iraq at the moment? In Baghdad? Let's say 20,000 and certainly not all or even most of these actively patrolling or attacking on the streets.

So what percentage of US military servicepersons in Baghdad does the number 171 killed represent? 171/20,000 = 0.855%

How many times larger is 0.855 than 0.0255 [actually 0.0255016309]? Well, 0.855/0.0255016309 = 33.50 THUS the unprotected civilian living in Philadelphia is roughly 33.5 TIMES safer than a US military serviceperson engaged in military operations against a hostile population.

Huh. Sounds like Baghdad might be a war zone or something.

I'll let others do the math for how much safer a US civilian is living in Philadelphia than an Iraqi citizen living in Baghdad.

Other infuriating news: I teach at an Los Angeles community college. Classes started last week. My satellite campus was visited by three uniformed Marine recruiters who swarmed the student parking lot "just having conversations" [as in "have you ever considered joining the Marine Corps?"] as one 20-year-old corporal told me. This young recruiter/used-car-salesman actually told me that he'd feel safer in Baghdad [however he hasn't yet been in Iraq] than in L.A. because of L.A.'s murder rate. ARRGGGHHH!!! Same fallacious comparison. It must work on the naive and uninformed sleep-walking potential recruits and uniformed servicepersons 'cause they're still using it.

Last bit of bad news: I was eating dinner in my favorite hole-in-the-wall Japanese eatery last night. They had "So You Want To Be A Millionaire" playing on their giant TV screen-- TV sound off, loudish stereo pumping out music. A 30s-something white US male contestant ponders for $25,000 this question: "Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the son of a blacksmith, was the surprise winner of the 2005 presidential election in which country? A. Iran B. Jordan C. Syria D. Pakistan." After some muted explanation, the contestant eliminates Jordan and Syria as possible answers. Then 90 seconds or so of high drama as he wavers between the remaining choices. Finally, he chooses: Pakistan.

We are doomed.