I never claimed I was commanding Marines in combat. I was warned not to join the Army so I acknowlwged limiting my options to the Marines.

On January 26th, 2010 at 11:38 am, corkie said:
Nobody claimed he was playing it safe. I challenged the claims that he played it unsafe …

LOL.

I’d be happy to eleborate if you wish.

No thanks. Please spare me any more examples of your “logic.” In fact, I’m done wasting time with you entirely. I’m sure you are pretty busy, too, what with commanding all those combat Marines and all. Bye.

I appreciate your logic with respect to a Tet type offensive, but I, and many others, never viewed that as much of a risk in Iraq – especially given the military’s defensive posture throughout the occupation. I’d be happy to eleborate if you wish.

I said:
Statistics after the fact don’t address the fact that no one could predict in advance what unforseen events could bring.

corkie said:
That statement is true but irrelevant.

Not irrelevant at all. The issue is not how statistically safe or unsafe a JAG deploying to Iraq might be; the issue is the level of honor and courage of those that accept this unknownable risk. In a place rife with targeted assisinations, suicide bombers, the threat of a biological or chemical attack and the possibility of a Tet-style offensive it shows courage and dedication to voluntarily serve one’s country. As far as one deploying under these circumstances could guess, casualties for their kind might be extremely high. What is irrelevant is statistics after the fact that show casuality rates that were lower than they might have been under other case scenarios. As a conservative Republican, I’m sure I could find plenty reasons to vote against Beau Biden for the U.S. Senate but his military service is somthing to be honored and any suggestion that he was playing it “safe” by voluntarily serving in any branch of the U.S. military, in any capacity, is despicable.

On January 26th, 2010 at 7:06 am, Flyoverman said:

they are in fact COMBAT DEATHS. Thus, since they are dead, becasue of their time in Vietnam and they are not in the precious tables you defend, your tables are skewed and thus false.

Are you implying that there are deaths caused by deployment to Iraq which aren’t accurately being considered deaths?

If so, then please elaborate.

That has been the point of your detractors from the beginning.

No, actually. It hasn’t.

There are so many data points you fail to include in your “calculations” if you call them that that your algorithms cannot have any relevance.

Tell me what data points aren’t included.

Better yet, let’s discuss adverse drug effect studies.

On January 25th, 2010 at 11:23 pm, valleygreaser said:

Statistics after the fact don’t address the fact that no one could predict in advance what unforseen events could bring.

That statement is true but irrelevant.

The 7 years of statistics describe very aggressively the risk of deploying to Iraq. One can argue that the risks are much LOWER now.

Those who refuse to give them that respect deserve our scorn.

Again, I agree with this statement, but it’s irrelevant.

Are you somehow implying that anyone that quantifies battlefield risk refuse to give the members of our military respect?

On January 26th, 2010 at 12:25 am, chapoutier said:

I will take the names of 29 lawyers that have been shot down, blown up, stabbed, beheaded, etc…

I could probably come up with 29, but I agree that 80k is too high of an assumption. We have to redo the math from scratch.

if you had a daughter you would feel absolutely no different in sending her to the University of Green Zone, Baghdad as opposed to the University of Delaware, Wilmington?

I’d rather she be a JAG deployed to Iraq than a student at the University of Delaware, Wilmington.

Does that answer that?

I’m sorry about these guys, but this has nothing to do with my statements.

Oh really.

Your whole premise is based on a comparison of mortality tables bewtween dometic workers and military personnel in a combat zone.

These dead soldiers I served with do not appear in anyones “tables.” However, they are in fact COMBAT DEATHS. Thus, since they are dead, becasue of their time in Vietnam and they are not in the precious tables you defend, your tables are skewed and thus false.

That has been the point of your detractors from the beginning. There are so many data points you fail to include in your “calculations” if you call them that that your algorithms cannot have any relevance.

Now throw in the fact that your primary assumption that working in Peoria, IL is the same as working in Ramadi, Iraq and work site conditions are the same with people in the area using military weapons trying to actively kill you and the whole discussion becomes totally ludicrous.

But keep patting yourself on the back for your brilliance.

Please provide us links to your data sources as well.

The case Biden is presumably working on has caused a sensation in Delaware, so he may have figured that no one would want to change horses midstream and the AG job is his if he wants it. Child predators are big news in this area because, almost on the same day, 11-year-old Sarah Foxwell disappeared and was found murdered on Christmas Day just across the Maryland line.

Meanwhile, Mike Castle is 70 years old and not in the best of health so finishing out the Senate term would likely be a capstone to his career. It leaves the younger Biden in a position to transition directly from AG to Senator four years hence while building up a resume of high-profile cases.

Michael Swartz
http://www.monoblogue.us

How many lawyers died total is irrelevant. I want to know how many were killed as a direct result of their occupation.

You don’t think occupational deaths need to be compared to other deaths to see if the number is statistically relevant? That’s crazy.

But very well, your job is now that much easier. I will take the names of 29 lawyers that have been shot down, blown up, stabbed, beheaded, etc… as a direct and proximate result of their chosen profession since 2003 here in the US. Of course, we both know not nearly 80K Jags have been through Iraq.

Or let me put it this way…if you had a daughter you would feel absolutely no different in sending her to the University of Green Zone, Baghdad as opposed to the University of Delaware, Wilmington?

I wish I knew how many have been over there total. I am, however, spotting you the absurdly high number of 80,000

You’re spotting me 80,000 JAGs having been in-country and claiming that it equates to 2,850 lawyers dying out of 1,143,000?

Are you assuming that 200 JAGs have died in country? That number doesn’t make any sense.