Obama’s Chicago Now More Deadly Than All of Iraq and Afghanistan


“Nearly 125 Shot Dead In Chicago Over Summer”

According to the Defense Department, 65 soldiers were killed in combat in Iraq. About the same number were killed in Afghanistan over that same period.

In the same time period, an estimated 245 people were shot and wounded in the city.


I think it’s time that America redeployed out of Chicago. They’re clearly not on the path towards reconcilliation. Let them fight their own civil war. That being said, I do like Senator Biden’s plan to divide the city into different three seperate and independent states.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

What about the people of Iraq how many of them died during this time period???

This a totally bogus comparison. Why not compare city to city?? say the citizens of Baghdad to the citizens of Chicago??

RAP, that would probably depend on who you asked. Ask someone who opposes the war and wants to abandon the Iraqis, and they’re likely to tell you 200,000 Iraqis were killed last month. Ask how many bodies? Probably find average number. It people cared about the lives of the Iraqis, then they’d advocate more security for them (ie more troops in Iraq or at least the current number). If they don’t care about em, then they’d argue just leave em and let em die to terrorist attacks, criminal gangs, etc.

I’m curious RAP, are you going to support a President Obama’s 16-48month occupation of Iraq?

Did not Obama, as a state legislator, vote against giving local police in Chicago automatic weapons to combat the criminals who has more sophistaced weaponry/????

‘Now more deadly than *all* of Iraq and Afghanistan’? You’re making yourself look bad here by deliberately ignoring all the civilian deaths in those places.
Of course, if we want to use your ‘US soldiers only’ metric we can easily reduce our body count to zero by leaving.

Chicago is a Quagmire, A Civil War, Another Vietnam!!!

Quick, let’s pull out the community organizers and bring them home!

vote against giving local police in Chicago automatic weapons to combat the criminals who has more sophistaced weaponry

More sophisticated than what? Than the average police officer’s gear? Than the automatic weapons mentioned? Than the existing SWAT equipment? I guess what I’m getting at is that I’m skeptical of this idea that criminals have really sophisticated weapons (in general; I know that there are exceptions like international drug cartels…). But I’m not even clear what you’re saying in the first place. If you’re claiming that a lot of crimes are being committed in the US with automatic weapons, you’re wrong.
Generally, if I were a lawmaker and the police requested automatic weapons, I’d want some specific scenarios where these were supposed to be useful. They have their place (the Secret Service uses them, SWAT is obviously going to want them in some cases) but for general policework I’m not sure I see the point. Maybe Curt would have more to say on the issue, he obviously has first hand experience.

bbart…Americans are leaving Iraq as fast as responsibly possible.
Pres Bush has the last combat brigades out around 2010/2011
Sen Obama has the last combat brigades out around mid 2010

People ask about the Iraqis killed…having talked to people there (including commanders on the ground), it seems that the US presence is helping keep the number of Iraqi deaths due to violence DOWN rather than up. That might be because US forces are there to help provide security, and it’s working. Complaints about staying beyond the next 90days should probably be directed at President Obama.

bbart displays a profound lack of informed knowledge in post #6:

More sophisticated than what?

I guess what I’m getting at is that I’m skeptical of this idea that criminals have really sophisticated weapons

You would be better off to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

Of course, if we want to use your ‘US soldiers only’ metric we can easily reduce our body count to zero by leaving.

And by consequence, increase the likelihood of an increase in Iraqi deaths and the real possibility of a collapse of a fledgling government into chaos.


Chicago simply needs more time. I recommend we be there for at least 100 years. Whatever it takes to achieve victory.

……or, we could pack up the citizenry to leave Chicago and easily reduce the body count to zero.

Obama gave up on his constituents a long, long time ago.

Google Obama’s relationship with Resko and other repugnant characters Obama; you’ll find that Obama praises shady characters as his mentors and then you’ll begin to understand why things in Chicago have not changed but gotten worst.

Here’s a sneak peek into Obama’s judgment on character.

Obama Endorses Kwame Kilpatrick:

Result: http://www.gatorcountry.com/swampgas/showthread.php?t=71341.

Obama’s judgment sucks! Obama claims to be against pork, but he lives in THE pig sty.

Obama’s judgement:
opposed the invasion in 2002
supported war in 2004
opposed war in 2005
opposed the surge in 2006/07
promised to continue the war in Iraq until 2013
promised to immediately withdraw troops from Iraq
then promised to continue war indefinitely w combat brigades mostly out by mid 2010 (4 months earlier than GWB plan)
demanded more troops for Afghanistan after GWB ordered it
went to Iraq and didn’t listen to generals (all of whom in theatre go to great lengths to describe how surge worked
went to Germany and gave speeches, but refused to visit wounded US troops w out cameras there for his own publiciity.
called on UNSC to stop UNSC member Russia from invading Georgia
expected NATO and EU to stop Russians
said talking w Iran would work…until US tried that and got laughed at by Iran
admitted in interview that his Pakistan policy is the same as Bush’s
removed American flag from his plane and put his personal logo over it
Believes raising taxes on businesses and business owners will somehow spur higher wages and more jobs (LMFAO!)
chose Gov-err, Senator Biden for a running mate instead of Hillary
tried to steal McCain’s convention thunder w O Reilly interview whereas McCain wasted money on a congratulations ad and called off politics on Obama’s nomination night.
Impotently called on his followers to stop hounding Sara Palin’s 17yr old daughter etc.

150 days as US Senator, then….
19months campaigning

He can’t lead (as demonstrated by his inability to deflect investigations into Palin’s family)
He’s ignorant on foreign policy (as he’s just doing same as GWB or worse in some cases)
His domestic plans are completely at odds w each other
He demonstrates personal arrogance almost as much as Bush
He’s shown dramatically poor political sense (see also vp choice)
He should be 20pts up in the polls, but his convention bounce was 8pts for 3 days, and now CBS has him tied w McCain, AND has him trailing Palin in popularity (can you imagine if Bill Clinton was trailing Dan Quayle in popularity?! Or if Ronald Reagan was less popular than Walter Mondale?!)

Obama’s in serious trouble.

Aren’t handguns banned in Chicago? Kind of goes with the theme “If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.” Just ask Australia……..

You would be better off to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

I expressed skepticism, which is to say I’m open to being proven wrong. My own impression of crime, which I admit is informed by my experiences on the less-than-hardened streets of Pittsburgh, is that 99+% of criminals have nothing more deadly than cheap handguns or at best some sort of gangster-image gun like a semiautomatic TEC-9. Maybe that qualifies as ‘more sophisticated weaponry’; the poster I’m responding to was a little unclear. Generally I would consider automatic weapons, sniper rifles, bulletproof body armor, and remote-controlled bombs as ‘more sophisticated weapons’ that justify a police upgrade to military-level gear. There have been isolated cases of US criminals with this kind of equipment (unfortunately you can’t trust the news when it comes to reports of ‘assault weapons’ in criminal hands). I remember a case in CA a few years back where some bank robbers had body armor and rifles, such that local police were outgunned for a while; also a case from 2006 where some gang members of MS-13 used an AK-47 (no word on whether it was actually fully automatic). But the general impression is that criminals lack the money, training, and discipline to gear themselves this way; not to mention that ‘rational criminals’, if you want to call them that, find that the attention and long sentences that come with this equipment make it a poor choice.
Since you seem pretty sure of yourself, maybe you can point me to some crimes committed in Chicago that used what you would consider sophisticated weapons, and explain how it would have helped if the police had had access to automatic weaponry in the case.

I tend to give bbartlog the benefit of the doubt. After all, he’s a recovering Ron Paulbot and after witnessing how cruelly he was misled on that score, I have hopes he will regain his senses.

It may be a slow process but I am hopeful he will rejoin the fold of sensible Americans.

Here’s the test: Bbartlog: you going to vote for McCain Palin?

C’mon Mike….don’t be yankin’ people’s chains just for fun. He’s got a tough choice. Gov Obama looks real good right now to a lotta people…well, half the people.

BB, being a cop in South Central Los Angeles I can tell you we are most definitely outgunned. At least in this area. We carry 9mm’s and a shotgun while we run into many gangsters with assault weapons of differn’t types…most often AK’s, most of the driveby’s we respond to involve those rifles.

So, Curt, you’re saying that it’s not just in small towns where people are bitter and clinging to their guns?

Curious, the article talked about Chicago, but what are Los Angeles’ stats for the same time period?

Scott: I continue to believe in the powers of Redemption. Bbartlog is worthy of that. Some of these loons, most noteably Roseburner, are not.

I await bbartlog’s statement on who he will vote for on Nov. 4.

OK, I’m confused. Somebody explain to me what the point is to such a comparison?

Oh come on Doug! Someone who revels in pointing out every weak point in our strategy in Iraq should be first in line to condemn the violent and political quagmire which has resulted from Democrat leadership in these urban areas that you folks hold up as a model for the rest of the country.

Scott- I liked your comment. Maybe Obama should spend more time concentrating on his own city before lashing out about whats going on with the rest of the world. I’m glad he finally agreed that the surge has worked. Iraq has such a low death toll right now, thank God. I have friends that just got back today without any casualties in the units!

Mike, just explain to me what the point is in the piece; or anyone who thinks it is making a sound point.

Okay… I’m wearing my black and white striped shirt and my whistle, now.

Doug, the point in the piece is that the DNC Congress seems to demand a “secure” Iraq using standards they don’t even apply to our own urban areas. No country, no city… no place inhabited by humans… will be sans crime and thugs.

And you can take that a step further with you bring Muslim countries into play with jihad movements walking in their midst.

It is a point I have made myself over and over. Congressional benchmarks as to what they feel is a measure of urban “security” in Iraq is just another talking point with no bearing in reality.

I wonder if that’s really the intended interpretation Scott had in mind.

He did throw out some numbers of people that were shot, mentioned Chicago, he posted a part of the article stating some soldiers were killed in Iraq; there certainly appeared there was an analogy being made. Yet he never explained the specifics of this case, developed the piece’s thesis, showed the point regarding the whole matter. He just assumed the truth of the article. In essence he just did a ‘grab ‘n’ post’, with no justification, then cut to sarcasm.

I mean, if I say the whole article is poop, not worth a dime, never even bothering to expose its ills and emptiness, then went on to joke about it, is that anymore worse than what Scott has done? He simply assumed it correct! Shouldn’t I be able to do the opposite: assume it is incorrect! Scott is not it’s author; he didn’t co-author it; he didn’t do the research for it; he’s not affiliated with it in any way. So, why can’t I simply deny its assertions, as he accepts them?

Someone may say, well the article has got an argument. It’s making a case about how Chicago can qualify as safer than Iraq! Scott wants those to disagree with it to tackle it.

I find that strange. First, it’s lazy; it’s one posting something without exploring it; taking it on faith. Second, what if I just did the same thing, posted an article that countered the piece, with no explanation. Would that help us get further along, advance the argument? No, I say. Ultimately, someone must dig inside the piece to interpret what it means.

Practically speaking, in posting something, then adding a sardonic catharsis, if there’s no examination as to why the piece is right, then the poster is simply echoing the article, being an errand boy, deciminating thoughts for play, as game. While that’s cool, and has, perhaps flash, it makes no case rationally, doesn’t push the thesis for any truth on the subject, it leaves it silent on that matter; and therefore, regarding the accuracy of the posted article one must side-step the issue on whether the poster has posted for accuracy or not, as there’s no way of telling.

But maybe Scott thinks this piece really is true. If so, he has to justify it.

So, MH, I had to ask for clarity. ; )

…to believe in the powers of Redemption. Bbartlog is worthy of that. …

Funny narrative you’ve constructed… can’t say I’ve changed my underlying views much, but the world does change and I have to make choices based on that.

I await bbartlog’s statement on who he will vote for on Nov. 4.

Still angling for assurance? I think I already posted twice here that I’d be voting for McCain. Best of a bad lot. Frankly I’d probably prefer Palin over McCain if that choice were available, she may not have his experience but her political record suggests she’s more principled.

being a cop in South Central Los Angeles I can tell you we are most definitely outgunned.

Thanks for the input Curt. Seems like gangs add a whole new dimension to crime, and for practical purposes we really don’t have serious gang activity where I live.

Oh Doug, you can complain about my laziness all you want, but I’m still gonna wear my PJs. All I did was post a link and cite from the article then add some rhetorical points for discussion. The stats come from a Chicago news station-not me.

Yawn, back to sleep now. It’s almost noon.

See… belief in redemption is a good thing. Bbartlog has saved himself from Ron Paulbot nincompoopery!