140,000 U.S. troops occupying Iraq, almost 2,000 have been killed.

[Guaranteed]

Not to mention almost 15,000 wounded, by the OFFICIAL toll. Other estimates are higher.

They've been rotated in and out, but that is still NOT a good percentage.

A number of our troops equal to approximately 1.4% of our occupying force have been KILLED.

A number of our troops equal to approximately 10.7% of our occupying force have been wounded, by the official estimates. Many of them have been severely wounded, maimed for life.

These might be good percentages to point out to anyone that is thinking of joining the military.

[ClintonTyree]

1. Yeah, statistics don't lie........

I've never thought about it in those terms, and you're right. That's sobering to look at.

[Guaranteed]

4. I guess the point I'm trying to make is that there is a very real chance

that anyone who is over there will get killed or wounded.

It's not a *good* chance, but it's significant. It wouldn't be a freak occurrence.

[BlueJac]

2. Let's rotate this way......

The National Guards come home and we send the House of Representatives, then we bring home the reserves and we send in the Senate. Think the war would be over in a New York minute!

[tex-wyo-dem]

3. Just curious...how does this compare with statistics from Vietnam?

[Guaranteed]

5. I think it would be difficult to compare, at this point.

For one, our force in Vietnam was continually increased over the years to over half a million troops.

And, our involvement there lasted for something like 12 to 14 years, with the final toll being over 58,000 dead.

We've only been in Iraq for about 2 1/2 years, at this point, and our occupying force is much smaller than the highest force we had in Vietnam.

So, I'm not sure how to compare them, really.

[boardwalk]

6. You have to show the rates as a % of unique soldiers that have been there.

I think that about 375,000 unique soldiers have served in the Iraq theater to date. That would mean your rate must be divided by 2.68. The 1.4 becomes .522 and the 10.7 becomes 3.99 because each unique soldier was exposed to the risk of death or injury over the last number of months we have been there; not just the current 140,000.

Math is not that tricky.

[Guaranteed]

7. Not necessarily.

It depends on if you're looking at the chances of any one particular soldier who goes over there, or if you're looking at the chance of any particular soldier who is actually there at the moment. The troops who have come home, or haven't gone yet, obviously can't be killed or maimed by the Iraqis, so that would seem to distort the chance of being killed or maimed downward. There are only 140,000 troops there at any given time.

The problem with these percentages is the time factor. The most precise way of putting these percentages would be in terms of per day, week, month, or year of service. But, I don't have the relevant stats for that.

I think a good, simple way of looking at it is just in terms of how many troops are there at any given time, compared with how many have been killed.

[boardwalk]

8. My college statistics professor would have just given you an F

for that answer and thrown your thesis away.

Sorry.

[Guaranteed]

11. What thesis?

BTW, check out what I wrote below, if you want the CORRECT way of looking at it, as opposed to the way that you suggested, using the total number of troops that have been there. That particular statistic is totally irrelevant. Different soldiers have toured for different periods of time, and the risk percentage for each of them, disregarding their particular jobs, should be the same.

If you could also point out anything that is incorrect in my OP, that would be great.

I know exactly what I'm doing here, my friend. I aced the math on my SAT's twice- once on the SAT, once on the PSAT.

[Guaranteed]

10. You know, on second thought, maybe we do have the stats to do that.

Let's put this in terms of per year of service. Could we possibly find an average tour of service length somewhere? That would be a good unit to use.

Anyway, we've had about 140,000 troops there, give or take a few thousand (and it's gone up and down), since March of 2003. It's been approximately 30 months, or 2 1/2 years, since the invasion.

So, 140,000 times 2 1/2 years of occupation equals about 350,000 man/years of service.

Divide that into 2,000 dead, and you get about .57% risk per man per year of service, for getting killed.

Being wounded is about 4.2% per man per year.

[neweurope]

9. The death quota among Iraqis is quite higher. I'm more

interested in that. Sorry.

------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!

[Guaranteed]

12. Yeah, but that's not going to be as relevant to someone who is

considering joining our military.

I'm just trying to put some perspective on our soldiers' chances of getting hurt.

[neweurope]

13. Yes, I understand. But I'm just pushing THIS story:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4934050

My heart is bleeding over that...

---------------

Remember Fallujah

Bush to The Hague!