1. Thanks for fixing the numbers, instead of, say, deleting my post. That (and I mean this without sarcasm) was generous, particularly as I am posting relatively anonymously.

2. As for posting anonymously… well, I don’t know. Doesn’t seem like a big deal. What’s the difference if you know my blog address or even my name? We still don’t know each other and will most likely never meet. Plus I’m usually kinder with my comments than “umm wrong” which was rather snarky and maybe even mean, so I think I’ll stick to disassociating these comments from my internet persona.

3. Back to the original point of your post, which was, I believe from the title, “Who is really the Warmonger?”:

It seems to me that a more accurate measure of Warmongering would be total combat deaths, not total deaths (the vast majority of which are, particularly in peacetime, “accident”). I suggest combining the totals for “hostile action” and “terrorist attack” to give you combat deaths. Using that metric the numbers are:

1993-2000: 76
2001-2006: 2733

I think those numbers speak for themselves and “Who is really the Warmonger?” should be clear. (Which, obviously, does not prove that said Warmonger was wrong to Mong a War).

I wonder though, why are you hiding? Are you not man enough (or woman enough) to post your real information?

Re-posting with permission from TheBisch.com
Whatever your politics, however you lean and however you feel about the current administration, this report is interesting. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the below s…

I grabbed this from my friend TheBisch’s blog:
Whatever your politics, however you lean and however you feel about the current administration, this report is interesting. As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the…

If it comes down to people doing their own research, forget about the majority of American’s figuring anything out.

If you dont mind, Im going to reference your post on my blog….