Don't get me wrong - I will never argue (or attempt to) that military service is a completely safe job. The reality is that it depends on so many things - the assignment, the unit, the commanders, your peers, and sometimes just luck or fate (if you believe in it). A soldier could be in the Army and never see combat and never see a dangerous situation. There are literally thousands for who that is the case. Then there are those who go immediately or even numerous times to combat zones. The risk is there. Still, it is fair to state that even if the recruiters failed to mention that risk, it is PLAINLY STATED when you take the oath and when you sign the contract. Timber cutters will never see terrorism up close (well not likely anyway). They will never pull guard duty with little or no sleep and have IEDs placed on the road on their way to work. However, most in the military also will never experience that and if they do, the military does a better job of training people to both do a job and be a soldier than any civilian school I know of. In the military you do it over and over and over and over again. Literally. You test and test and retest. I will always ADMIRE every single soldier who volunteers. Even with the best training in the world, there will always be the chance that he or she could get an assignment to a unit which will be deployed to a dangerous area. Yet, it is an experience that will make you or break you and I wouldn't have passed it up for anything.



>You're right. I was just restating what CNN said in it's report. I'm not a military person, so tell me, when someone "joins the military", do they get to choose the reserve, or is that up to the military to decide. I know that's probably a very naive question but the truth is (don't get mad now) I've never paid much attention to the processes of the military and I have no idea how all that works. Maybe you "join the reserve" instead of the army etc?
>
>>Ok, the death rates are listed per 100,000. Let's look at the numbers:
>>
>>Total active duty: 1,411,287
>>Total Guard/Reserve: 66,000
>>Total Reserve Full Time: 234,629
>>Total For Computations: 1,711,916
>>Total Active Duty all Components: 2,659,000 (I won't use this number)
>># of Military Deaths in 2004: 1887 (it was 1410 in 2003 but we'll use the higher number)
>>
>>Deaths per 100,000 in 2004: 110
>>Deaths per 100,000 in 1999: 32.4
>>End Strength in 1999: 1525942 Deaths 788 Ratio: 51.63
>>
>>Last year, the military lost 310 service members and employees to car crashes alone
>>
>>That puts yr 2004 at number 2 (after Timber Cutters which were at 117.8) and ahead of Fishers
>>and yr 1999 (a typical year) at (#5 on the list after Metal Workers & before Roofers)
>>
>>31,000 convenience store clerks are shot every year (I had no idea)
>>
>>The problem with the combat related deaths is that they cover 1 May 2003 to the present which encompasses multiple years. For a true comparison, you have to break it down to the number of deaths per 100,000 for the same year. The most recent statistics I found numbers for (which I posted) were for 2003.
>>
>>http://siadapp.dior.whs.mil/personnel/CASUALTY/Death_Rates.pdf
>>
>>
>>>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.