"Jeff Rigby" wrote in message
...

"Harry.Krause" wrote in message
...
Online at: http://politicalaffairs.net/article/...iew/1213/1/99/


Dying in Iraq is not a career choice

By Bud Deraps

6-01-05,9:44am

Completely unknown to these young people, and never discussed by
recruiters, is the fact that of the 580,000 U.S. troops who served in the
six-week 1991 Gulf War, 11,000 are now dead, and by the year 2000,
325,000 were on permanent medical disability from the depleted uranium
weaponry and the many other toxic and horrifying conditions they were
exposed to.

Wrong, according to The New England Medical journal in a study, the
veterans were healthier than the US general population of the same age
with a LOWER mortality rate than expected.
http://content.nejm.org/cgi/content/short/335/20/1498

There was a higher accident rate of 9/1000 than the national average.
Returning veterans that experienced stressful combat conditions have a
higher accident rate. One may speculate that they hold live cheaper
having seen so much death. They take fewer precautions and don't think
that falling from a ladder can kill one as much as a bullet fired by the
enemy, the ladder isn't trying to kill me right?

Also unknown is the fact that over half of those who served in that war
are now parenting children who are born with some birth defect when
previous children were born normal.

Wrong, there is a 2 times increase in infant birth defects as reported by
vets. So if there are 3/1000 in the general population there are 6/1000
among gulf war vets. This fact is not documented by an independant study
and may be much lower.



http://deploymentlink.osd.mil/deploy...ts/DoD1C.shtml




The person who wrote this article is either an idiot who can't read or a
lier who has no regard for the truth.

Most likely both.........but it is not surprising harry would use such a
source