![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Aug. 16th, 2009 12:36 amJust been reading that 200 people have now been killed in Aghanistan, over the last 7/8 years.
Obviously it's a tragedy that anybody is killed (although there is the point of view that if you join the army you expect to get killed and can't complain about it) but I'm annoyed that this particular milestone is given such importance when, for example when HMS Hood was sunk in 1941, 1,415 people died (only 3 crew survived) in a matter of minutes. That's 7 times more than have been killed in 7 years in Afghanistan.
My point is, I suppose, that we shouldn't be getting hung up on 200 being a significant milestone.
*le shrug*
Obviously it's a tragedy that anybody is killed (although there is the point of view that if you join the army you expect to get killed and can't complain about it) but I'm annoyed that this particular milestone is given such importance when, for example when HMS Hood was sunk in 1941, 1,415 people died (only 3 crew survived) in a matter of minutes. That's 7 times more than have been killed in 7 years in Afghanistan.
My point is, I suppose, that we shouldn't be getting hung up on 200 being a significant milestone.
*le shrug*
