[img]http://www.lies.com/images/first_year_sm.gif[/img]

[img]http://www.lies.com/images/first_four_years_sm.gif[/img]

[img]http://www.lies.com/images/entire_war_sm.gif[/img]

I don't know if which group died in a short time period, the first thousand or the second thousand. It does seem like the rate is accelerating.

What's scary is that most of the day to day security is being handled my the Iraqi military and police now and the casualty rate of the "coalition" is still rising... that's not including the deaths of Iraqi military or police which have higher figures attached to them.

It's still an upward trend, but I don't know that it's accelerating.

I did a quick regression and it looks to me like the current trend line is for each month to carry about one more fatality than the month before it.

The formula is

US Monthly fatalities = 46.3+1.03xMonth of conflict where Oct 2005 is month 32.

So for example, we'd expect November fatalities to be about 80, December 81 and so on. Assuming the trend line doesn't change it would imply something like 1060 fatalities for 2006, so we'd pass 3000 around next Thanksgiving.

To see if it were accelerating, I think you'd have to test a number of non linear functions and check the slope at the end of the curve.

I did one gut check and it shows that 6 months ago the simple linear regression showed a slope of 1.24, higher than the current 1.03. That implies a decelleration, but it's not enough evidence to say for sure. I that's the case, although even in that scenario it still implies close to 1000 US dead next year.

Thank's Dean. I though I'd let you know about the figures before I said it was accelerating, but I just looked at the graph and said to myself, "Hey this is getting worse, not better".

I defer to your interpretations of the actual numbers though.

A couple of graphs that need to be added.

Graph 1: How many troops were in Vietnam starting in Dec 61 to the end compared to the number of troops in Iraq Mar 03 until now?

Graph 2: How many combat units were active in Dec 61 to the end in Vietnam compared to the combat units in Iraq from Mar 03 until now?

Even that wouldn't tell the whole picture. The total number of troops deployed tell you nothing about the way the troops were deployed (what percentage of those killed in Vietnam were involved in offensive operations) or the difference in armor technology or the change in life saving medical technology (what percentage of the wounded in action in died in Vietnam vs. Iraq.?)

I don't suspect that the casualty levels in Iraq will ever approach the Vietnam level, the public simply won't tolerate it.

Remember: less than two months to get in your charitable deductions for the year LP.

As I flood victim, I take personal cheques, money orders, or email money transfers. Merci.

Matthew 19:9 (Revised Standard) -- And I say to you: whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another, commits adultery."

Or if you prefer King James -- And I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.

Jesus said divorce was permitted in cases of your spouse cheating on you.

Real Christians read the Bible.

But there's more in the "good" book....

"If a man commits adultery with the wife of his neighbor, both the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death." (Leviticus 20:10)

Not much need for divorce as the "spouse" is already taken care of.

But apparently, not all of it.

You are free to present whatever graphs you may.

Some suggest that there are fewer deaths in the current war because medical science has improved that much since other wars.

Time will tell the tail. Eventually.