A truly maddening question:

[zbdent]

A thought occurred to me recently, and I am going to do research on it.

Almost everybody who follows the news in one way, shape, or form, (except Faux news viewers) knows that Bush43's total US military dead in Iraq conflict surpassed Bush41's total.

A lot of people also recognize that the number of deaths from combat since May 1 has surpassed the number of combat deaths in Iraq prior to May 1.

My question is this:

Has (or at what point has) the number of US military dead in Operation Iraqi Freedom surpassed the total number of military deaths (combat and non) under Clinton's entire Presidency?

That's the number we should be bandying about.

[trotsky]

1. Waste of time, I'm afraid.

Different circumstances. The "War on Terra (TM)" is underway, people expect there to be casualties. Comparing military deaths under * to those under Clinton is useless.

(And yes, I am aware that conquering Iraq won't do a thing to stop terrorism, but a lot of Americans think it will.)

[SlavesandBulldozers]

2. is that relevant?

the RW loves to switch the subject to Clinton, why don't we just let them simmer in their own stew?

In all fairness to both Clinton and Bush, they find themselves in much different national security environments. The difference is such that in my opinion the two can't be compared logically.

Plus it is a changing of the subject, do not let Bush off the hook by introducing such a illogical comparison.