http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/c...2,0,55475.story

 

Chicago closed out the year with 509 homicides, an increase of about 15 percent over 2007, but still among the lowest numbers in decades, according to preliminary data released by the department Thursday.

 

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/articl...lP_fjwD95DTIB80

 

According to a tally by The Associated Press, at least 314 U.S. soldiers died in Iraq in 2008, down from 904 in the previous year

There are 8.5 million people in the Chicago metro, and about 100k soldiers in Iraq.

 

Still though, I am very happy to see the levels of violence continuing to fall in Iraq. Makes it that much easier to get out of that place soon.

 

Also, edited the topic title a bit, for clarity. As originally written, looked like it was talking about how many people the US had killed in Iraq.

 

 

So are you saying that Chicago is more dangerous than Iraq? I'm sure more people have died in Iraq due to the war than have been murdered in Chicago in the last 20 years.

So are you saying that Chicago is more dangerous than Iraq?

 

I think people would look at it a little differently if 314 policemen died in Chicago last year...

 

Which is probably a more realistic comparison.

 

 

 

"if we can get enough kids to grow old enough for you to send to Iraq to get their heads blown off for the President's amusement."

 

 

When reached for comment, the President was furious that his amusement level has dropped off due to the lack of US casualties.

While it is an interesting comparison, we should be careful what kinds of conclusions are drawn from it. I think it would be wrong to state that Iraq is safer than Chicago.

 

It may be interesting to ponder if Chicago would be better if there was armed military patrolling the roads.

Well clearly this doesn't state that Iraq is safer than Chicago. The iraq number doesn't include the large majority of people killed in violence - only US soldiers.

 

I assume the point that SS was trying to make, was just to point how how far down the violence has gone in Iraq, which is a very good thing.

 

Well clearly this doesn't state that Iraq is safer than Chicago. The iraq number doesn't include the large majority of people killed in violence - only US soldiers.

 

I assume the point that SS was trying to make, was just to point how how far down the violence has gone in Iraq, which is a very good thing.

 

Wouldn't the better comparison be 2007 to 2008 Iraq numbers? Which truly shows the decline.