But, yeah, calling me more names really makes me want to read your stuff and consider a rational response.
How's this ... if you're not pulling numbers out of your ass, your comparisons of casualty rates (though apples and oranges to the comparisons I requested) provide some merit for your argument. Without links though, I have nothing to go by but your word. Ordinarily, I would assume someone who bandies about facts and numbers is not making them up (despite this being, ya know, the internet). But someone who has posted like a 4-year-old does not strike me as the scholarly type. Your demeanor works against you when your communication is all you have to be judged by. So ... perhaps you'll understand that I don't find you trustworthy.
But yeah, if by some chance you're not making shit up, ^ there's your admission by me that your points have merit.
.