CBS Bowl Projection

[VObserver]

VObserver the point was that Detroit was more dangerous than Iraq. Automobile accidents can occure in Iraq as well. And I doubt the auto injury rate is appreciably higher in Detroit than in any other city. What doesn't usually happen in Detroit, is you driving your car over a IED.

I am by no means claiming we are safe here, or even that Detroit is not an extremely dangerous place.

Kind of a pointless arguement, anyway I guess.

I agree that it is a pointless argument.

By the way, military casualty figures include deaths and injuries from ALL causes, including auto accidents and disease.

[jjlouv]

Boy boy boy... Leave it to a bunch of sports fans to miss the point completely and turn to statistics! LOL

[CajunDreDog]

What happened to the bowl thread that was going on????

[Geaux]

I would imagine we would only want an invite from a bowl game along I-10. Thats where we recruit. With that being said, Ark St and ULM may be an option for the Heart of Dallas Bowl and the Armed Forces Bowl?

[Turbine]

The only fair comparison would be something like National Guard troops in Detroit vs National Guard troops in Iraq. Or civilians in Detroit vs civilians in Iraq.

jmo

[MelRock]

I was hoping this would die, but it has not so I will try to explain what I was thinking for what it is worth.
I have a very good friend who is a marine and has spent time in Iraq. He is also a police officer in Detroit and in his word he felt safer in Iraq. I was NOT trying to be funny or offend anyone or make light of the situation in Iraq. It was a bad comparison.
Thank you and hopefully now we can return to our regularly scheduled program.

Geaux Cajuns!

[CharlieK]

I'd go to the bowl game in Iraq.

I'd just stay real close to Coach Witt.

[RaginScotsman]

No. 1- Win one more game

No. 2- The majority of projections have us going to the Heart of Dallas Bowl or Godaddy.com.

Either one would be awesome if New Orleans doesn't come calling.

[VObserver]

The only fair comparison would be something like National Guard troops in Detroit vs National Guard troops in Iraq. Or civilians in Detroit vs civilians in Iraq.

jmo

Not a fair comparison, Turb. Casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan are lower for NG troops than for regular Army. There are several factors that affect that, the primary one being that NG troops tend to be older, better educated, married and as well trained as regular troops. Age, education and marriage are all factors which positively affect survival in war zones.

[Just1More]

Not a fair comparison, Turb. Casualty rates in Iraq and Afghanistan are lower for NG troops than for regular Army. There are several factors that affect that, the primary one being that NG troops tend to be older, better educated, married and as well trained as regular troops. Age, education and marriage are all factors which positively affect survival in war zones.

You aren't going to win, Charlie. You are dead nuts on, but you cannot win when people don't know what they're talking about. Detroit is an extremely dangerous city and the wars we've recently participated in are not as dangerous (mortality-wise)... period. The numbers don't lie. But, you can't win the emotional argument with those that don't like the implication. You can talk to a young man that left Detroit and joined the Army, knowing he's heading to Iraq for combat duty, and he'll clearly tell you that he was safer in Iraq. After seeing his brother, uncle and cousin shot to death in Detroit, he'll validate in no uncertain terms that reality.

It isn't even just Detroit. For the same age group, you are safer in Iraq and/or Afghanistan in the military than ALL American males in the U.S. Interestedly, there was a scare of suicides in the military deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. It is actually lower than the nation's average for the same age group. You simply cannot explain this to people that emotionally don't except the facts. I, like you, believe that the data does not explain that people in the military are, in general, mentally and emotionally more stable than their peers of the same age group.

[CharlieK]

You aren't going to win, Charlie. You are dead nuts on, but you cannot win when people don't know what they're talking about. Detroit is an extremely dangerous city and the wars we've recently participated in are not as dangerous (mortality-wise)... period. The numbers don't lie. But, you can't win the emotional argument with those that don't like the implication. You can talk to a young man that left Detroit and joined the Army, knowing he's heading to Iraq for combat duty, and he'll clearly tell you that he was safer in Iraq. After seeing his brother, uncle and cousin shot to death in Detroit, he'll validate in no uncertain terms that reality.

It isn't even just Detroit. For the same age group, you are safer in Iraq and/or Afghanistan in the military than ALL American males in the U.S. Interestedly, there was a scare of suicides in the military deployed to Iraq and Afghanistan. It is actually lower than the nation's average for the same age group. You simply cannot explain this to people that emotionally don't except the facts. I, like you, believe that the data does not explain that people in the military are, in general, mentally and emotionally more stable than their peers of the same age group.

If I (actually me, not the hypothetical me) were to go to detroit, I would not be taking part in the activities that contribute to the higher than average "danger" in that city. However, if I were to join the army, and be shipped to Iraq I would almost certainly be taking part in the types of activities that can make you a casualty in a warzone. For me, an average joe, Iraq as a soldier would definitely be more dangerous than Detroit.

[CharlieK]

I'd still go to the Iraq Bowl. Bowl trips rule.