CBS Bowl Projection

[Zeebart21]

My oldest daughter is dating a guy from Stratford, Ontario.... between Detroit and Toronto.

Awesome...dude needs to hook us up!!

Z

[VObserver]

Well, they live in Nashville, but his family is still in Ontario.

[jjlouv]

I don't think it is beneath us, I just prefer not to go into a battle zone. I would feel safer in Iraq than I would in Detroit. I have spent the last 15 years up north and I can tell you there is nothing good that comes out of that city.

Geaux Cajuns

Well I spent about 13 months in Iraq... And I can tell you that you'd be better off in Detroit!

[Boomer]

Well I spent about 13 months in Iraq... And I can tell you that you'd be better off in Detroit!

----And Sir we certainly thank you for your service to our country!!!

[VObserver]

Well I spent about 13 months in Iraq... And I can tell you that you'd be better off in Detroit!

Thanks for your service... and though you would undoubtedly be better off, you would not be technically safer.

[bustleup]

Well I spent about 13 months in Iraq... And I can tell you that you'd be better off in Detroit!

1. Thank you
2. Thanks for setting these morons straight that think a war zone is safer then an American city

[Just1More]

Bullets are bullets and dead is dead.

Oh, and for the record... I do not want the Cajuns in the Baghdad Bowl either. I don't think we'd travel well for that one.

[bustleup]

Bullets are bullets and dead is dead.

Oh, and for the record... I do not want the Cajuns in the Baghdad Bowl either. I don't think we'd travel well for that one.

We can agree on that bowl game!

[VObserver]

1. Thank you
2. Thanks for setting these guys straight that think a war zone is safer then an American city

You are welcome.

My sarcasm meter is working, so I recognize yours.

Just be aware that death rate numbers do not lie, and it is incontrovertible truth that an 18-35 year old male is less likely to die from any cause if he is a soldier, airman, sailor or marine in armed conflict in Iraq or Afghanistan than if he is a civilian in the Continental US. I do not have figures for debilitating injury, but I strongly suspect that he is also less likely to suffer that as well.

[CharlieK]

1. Thank you
2. Thanks for setting these guys straight that think a war zone is safer then an American city

In comparing mortality rates, some are painting a misleading picture. There are many more that come back from war zones like Iraq with arms and legs missing...any many other terrible injuries. So why you might be as likely to get shot in Detroit (I don't know the statistics) I would bet you are much more likely to come back from a war zone mangled than you would from Detroit. Safety isn't just safety from death.

I know the comment was meant tonque in cheek, but it's a poor choice of joke....IMHO.

[VObserver]

In comparing mortality rates, some are painting a misleading picture. There are many more that come back from war zones like Iraq with arms and legs missing...any many other terrible injuries. So why you might be as likely to get shot in Detroit (I don't know the statistics) I would bet you are much more likely to come back from a war zone mangled than you would from Detroit. Safety isn't just safety from death.

I know the comment was meant tonque in cheek, but it's a poor choice of joke....IMHO.

Charlie, check the severe injury rates in combat in our current conflicts; then check the severe injury rates from auto and industrial accidents and get back with me.

I am not arguing that it is safe to be in combat. I am pointing out that there is only an illusion of safety here. We FEEL safe because we are totally oblivious to the carnage around us caused by accidents and even by crime.

I freely admit that the numbers are skewed in favor of the combat soldier precisely because he is acutely aware of the danger he is in and is highly trained and effectively equipped to deal with it.

I strongly suspect that a platoon of Army Rangers would be safer patrolling the streets of Detroit than the same group patrolling streets in Bagdhad, given the same rules of engagement, but most of us have neither the awareness nor the training of Rangers.

[CharlieK]

Charlie, check the severe injury rates in combat in our current conflicts; then check the severe injury rates from auto and industrial accidents and get back with me.

I am not arguing that it is safe to be in combat. I am pointing out that there is only an illusion of safety here. We FEEL safe because we are totally oblivious to the carnage around us caused by accidents and even by crime.

I freely admit that the numbers are skewed in favor of the combat soldier precisely because he is acutely aware of the danger he is in and is highly trained and effectively equipped to deal with it.

I strongly suspect that a platoon of Army Rangers would be safer patrolling the streets of Detroit than the same group patrolling streets in Bagdhad, given the same rules of engagement, but most of us have neither the awareness nor the training of Rangers.

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.