I wouldn't argue with that, but IIRC, this whole thing was about (at least the latest thread drift anyway) whether or not joining the military was a good idea from a danger point of view. Since you can't tell when when you might be plunged into that war, my own take is that it's not such a great choice. If you join during peace, what assurance do you have that, during your stint, peace will still be prevalent? At least with logging etc, you know ahead of time what you're getting into and that the job isn't likely to suddenly become more dangerous by a couple of orders of magnitude while your doing it.

I'm not saying nobody should join the military, but if danger is a relevant factor in your decision, then maybe sober second thought is not a bad way to go.

>But if you take the numbers over a decade or more and average them, I suspect that you will find Military lower then at least the first three, because, Yes the military deaths spikes when there is a war on, but during peace, it is much lower. Logger, fisherman and flyer all are steady losses.
>
>>Except that you are linking to a money cnn report from 2003. If you link to the current one from August 2006 here, you'll see partway down the page, the following statement:
>>
>>

>>The BLS does not count combat deaths in its survey;
>>if it did, the military would undoubtedly have qualified
>>as America's most dangerous job last year.
>>

>>
>>I suspect the Bureau of Labour Statistics didn't include combat deaths in 2003 either.
>>
>>>Those are actuarial statistics based on per capita rates. The military doesn't even make the list. They have less of a chance of getting killed in their profession than those on the list (statistically speaking). The apologist crowd will just ignore the facts and make up their liberal gobbly-gook (sp?). The libs don't want facts and logic, they want "make-me-feel-good" emotionalism.
>>>
>>>
>>>>Have you looked at the internet for dangerous jobs? I did a google and found 2 different sites that list 10 of the most hazardous jobs.
>>>>
>>>>http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/13/pf/dangerousjobs/
>>>>http://www.forbes.com/2002/09/03/0903worksafe.html
>>>>
>>>>how many jobs other then the military have over 1 million (not sure of the exact number) employed at the same time? Timber cutters lost 84 out of 100,000 in 2002.
>>>>
>>>>>You said this:
>>>>>"the military is no more dangerous than most other professions"
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm not sidestepping anything by saying I think you're wrong and that is ridiculous. (yeah my spelling stinks...heh)
>>>>>
>>>>>What other professions here in the USA lost 105 people last month due to the nature of the job, hummm? I assure you that "most other professions" did not loose 105 people due to the nature of their job. What does this have to do with driving your car? ...unless you're a truck driver or something....
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Again, without side-stepping the argument:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Statistics show that you have a greater chance of being killed or seriously injured by driving your car than you do by being in the military. Therefore, driving is more dangerous than being in the military.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>P.S. The word is "ridiculous"
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Tamar:
>>>>>>>>... the military is no more dangerous than most other professions.....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>That's ridicilious.