POLL: When do we hit the Thousand mark ?

[Cyrus]

The number of Coalition soldiers killed in Iraq has recently surpassed the one thousand mark. The number of American soldiers killed in Iraq currently stands at a little more than eight hundred and eighty (http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/) dead.

When do you believe the number of American soldiers killed in Iraq will reach the one thousand mark?

[natedogg]

nt

[MMMMMM]

I'm trying to think of a good reason for this poll--any good reason--and haven't yet come up with one.

[Utah]

Okay, I am missing it. Why is this tasteless?

I go at Cyrus probably as much as anyone, but I dont think its tasteless. Irrelevant-probably. But tasteless-no.

[cardcounter0]

You mean we shouldn't care how many US Troops are killed?
Shouldn't speculate on the costs in human lives on this War?
Just let Rummy worry about it, and not question?

[MMMMMM]

"You mean we shouldn't care how many US Troops are killed?
Shouldn't speculate on the costs in human lives on this War?
Just let Rummy worry about it, and not question?"

Those questions aren't included in Cyrus' poll, though, cardcounter0.

All Cyrus is asking is when we will cross the 1,000 mark. So unless this some sort of Sklansky-esque question designed to help us learn to think (maybe we can somehow solve this problem by thought alone), I don't see the point of those poll questions.

[cardcounter0]

By saying when do we hit 1000, you are speculating on the RATE of death. I guess you don't care about that.

[MMMMMM]

Not that it would matter if I cared a lot, a little, or something in between.

[cardcounter0]

Yes, I didn't think US Troops dying in Bush's little adventure would be high on your priority list.

Got any more funny gay pictures?

[Utah]

Please tell me why 1,000 deaths is significant?

Are you also upset about the HUGE number of people in this country that die from - homicides, medical mistakes, car accidents, alcohal, etc.?

If you are so life conscious, would you support a campaign to lower the national speed limit to 25? It would say 100,000s of lives in a decade. If not, why?

1,000 is deaths absolutely nothing in relative terms. Heck 10,000 is nothing in relative terms.

[MMMMMM]

"Yes, I didn't think US Troops dying in Bush's little adventure would be high on your priority list."

Why should something I have no control over be high on my priority list?

"Got any more funny gay pictures?"

No, but I'll see if I can locate some for you. Hold on a minute.

[Cyrus]

Natedogg finds the poll "tasteless". M asks "what's the point?"

I thought it was obvious: We use a decimal system, a base-10 system in our arithmetic counting. This makes some numbers, for psychological reasons rather than mathematical reasons, more "important" to our perception than others. Numbers such as, you guessed it, 10, 100, 1000, etc. (And 200, 250, 1500, 2000, etc. As opposed to "indifferent" numbers like 57, 880, 1048, 1873. Please try to pay attention.)

You can bet serious money that when the time comes (note use of "when" and not "if") that the number of American casualties in Iraq surpasses the One Thousand mark, the media coverage of that event will be a lot more intense than when reporting any other number. I don't care how you wanna measure that intensity, it will be there and it will be serious - from different points of view, of course (Fox will mourn more; CBS will be outraged more; etc).

So, if we accept that the media coverage of the war has an effect on the presidential elections, the One Thousand mark will have an effect on the elections. (If it happens before the day of the election, that is...)