Followup: Worry Not, President Will NOT Pull Out of Chicago, LA or NY
Startling new Army statistics show that strife-torn Baghdad - considered the most dangerous city in the world - now has a lower murder rate than New York.
The newest numbers, released by the Army's 1st Infantry Division, reveal that over the past three months, murders and other crimes in Baghdad are decreasing dramatically and that in the month of October, there were fewer murders per capita there than the Big Apple, Chicago, Los Angeles and Washington, D.C.
...
According to the Army, there were 92 murders in Baghdad, a city of 5 million people, in July. The number dropped to 75 in August, 54 in September and 24 in October.
In New York, a city of 8 million people, there were 52 murders in July, 51 in August, 52 in September and 45 in October.
Get the rest of this story from the New York Post.
Here's more...
In spite of the New Year violence, the city recorded less than 600 homicides for the second year in a row. The unofficial homicide tally for 2003 is 596, according to police statistics, compared with 587 in 2002.
Chicago, the nation's third-largest city, has claimed the unwanted title for the second year in a row of having the most murders. Chicago's unofficial murder tally is 599, compared with 648 in 2002.
Through Monday, Los Angeles, the nation's second-largest city, had recorded 490 homicides, a drop of 23 percent from 633 in 2002.
Police officials and experts _ who view homicide as the most reliable and telling of the major crime statistics _ insist there's no cause for alarm in New York, with its slight increase in murders this year.
Get the full article from Newsday.
Matt's Chat
Fear not, good citizens, we will not be pulling out of these fine American cities. Nor should we pull out of Baghdad or the rest of Iraq for that matter until the job is done. Those who give you the body count in Iraq are trying to confuse the American people into thinking that we are in some sort of Vietnam-like quagmire. That couldn't be farther from the truth.The reality of the situation in Iraq is this: our forces went farther, faster, with fewer casualties than any other military campaign in history. What our guys are facing now is a guerilla insurgency headed by Saddam loyalists and carried out by thugs, terrorists, and militant Islamists. Our military is getting the job done. The leadership on the ground, at the Pentagon, and at the White House have a LOT to be proud of in regards to their actions and accomplishments in Iraq.
Fellow citizens, I implore you to stand up against those who would falsely portray the war in Iraq. Just to be clear, I am talking about the media fools who continue to give the wrong impression about the situation in Iraq; I am referring to the radical liberals, like Howard Dean, who oppose the war at all costs; and I am calling out those politicians who seek to undermine American soverignty by entangling our affairs and processes in what they like to call "internationalization."
My last word on this subject: it really isn't about numbers. It is about continuing to do what is right. Our military and this administration has acted in the best interests of the country and the world and will continue to do so.
Mark's Remarks
Besides, folks, we are in a time of war. Whether we have the official declaration or not, we are in war. And, in this war, we started off in one day with almost 3,000 casualties on 9/11. See, the liberals want us to forget 9/11. They want us to forget the tragedy that day and only dwell on the here and now. We have to look at the big picture, past and present.
Since 9/11, our casualties still number WAY below 5,000 in terms of deaths. The loss of any soldier is tragic. The injuring of any American is tragic. However, we have done so much in so little time, and we are winning, each and every day. No matter what the fifth column of libs and dims here in America tell you, we are winning. It frosts me to see them with their so what? about saddam talk, then they try to butch up with "we still support our men and women." Bull! If they truly supported them, would they be calling this an "unjust" war? If it were an unjust war, then our soldiers are unjust by fighting in it. Guilt by association. These folks take for granted our freedoms, they take for granted their own self-importance, and they care not for our men and women. All they care about is power and their own vision. They should not be in the White House, even in the executive outhouse. This war is too important to place in the hands of the appeasers, those who wallow in self-loathing and belly up when times get tough.
