The wild fires in California have been raging for just over a week now, and 20 people have died.
That's over twice the number of American soldiers who died in combat in Iraq over the same time period.
For additional perspective, DC is expected to have about 325 murders this year, which at current rates is about 100 more deaths than we can expect for US soldiers in Iraq.
Posted by Rich at October 30, 2003 11:31 AM | TrackBackWhen did it become vogue to play the "acceptable ways to die game"? When the PC fools took over, or has it been longer than that?
Love the perspective. It's a shame it will be lost on the whiners.
Posted by: radtec on October 30, 2003 11:55 AMYes but the fires are an act of God and the murders are acts of criminals. Hardly a fair comparison. Oh, wait. The war in Iraq was started by a bunch of criminals and commanded by a guy who thinks God picked him for the job. Never mind. Anyway, one soldier's life is a very high price to pay, and sometimes necessary, but never "acceptable".
Posted by: skb on October 31, 2003 8:18 AMThe comparison has nothing to do with causes, only actual casualty rates. While some point to the casualty rate in Iraq as proof of a failed plan, it is instructive to consider that casualty rate in comparison with other risks.
We will mourn the 20-25 people who died in the wildfires, but nobody will argue that we should abandon southern California, or evacuate Washington DC.
Posted by: rich on October 31, 2003 10:16 AM