In fact, the article says “At least 8,000 members of the all-volunteer U.S. military have deserted since the Iraq war began, Pentagon records show, although the overall desertion rate has plunged since the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001.” (note, plunged–the correct use of a relative term, going from 3,949 in FY2000 to 2011 desertins in FY2005.)

What is also included (and ignored) in the article was this:
“Opposition to the war prompts a small fraction of desertions, says Army spokeswoman Maj. Elizabeth Robbins. ‘People always desert, and most do it because they don’t adapt well to the military,’ she says. The vast majority of desertions happen inside the USA, Robbins says. There is only one known case of desertion in Iraq.”

What I still don’t understand is why, when I simply say that someone didn’t do their homework, they feel the need to “get all up in my grill” about it? Come on, what was so threatening to you by my simply linking to you? (Honestly–I don’t see why it bothers you so much.)

That doesn’t even deserve to be dignified with an answer.
====
Apple Polisher here. The irony is, of course, that you have answered the comment yet you have not replied to the substance of the comment. That leads me to believe that you recognize that you are wrong and therefore unable to refute my comments, yet somehow feel the need to bluster.

With regard to your other comments today on other posts here and here, are we to be generous and assume you are being sarcastic, responding to The Professor’s criticisms of you and your inability to respond with anything other than vulgarities with statements like “blah blah blah go fuck yourself blah” and expressing the desire “to boot him in the nuts”? No. Probably not.

That doesn’t even deserve to be dignified with an answer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/05/26/BL2006052600966_pf.ht

The problem? While the link he posted takes you to a publication that is not obscure, it IS still a lone person’s personal point of view. Just because it is in the Pot doesn’t mean it is anything other than that person’s opinion. At least not when it is in their blog/oped section.

NAP, you seem to have a real penchant for neglecting to read and comprehend the articles to which you link.

ONE of us is actually committed to open dialogue and free speech.

Now, on to your content. Interestingly, my only point in referencing your blog was to mention what I felt was the ironic juxtapositioning of my viewing. I viewed your blog, actually just before reading the Language Log, and found the contrasts amusing.

As for having the students, or anyone else, check the facts, that is actually what I have them do! I also encourage all of you to read the source documents that are so often (mis)cited by folks, including you. Do you not remember your erroneous reporting of a flood of desertions, based on what in actuality is a 50% decline since the waning Clinton years?

Anyway, thanks for stopping by, and apparently making my blog a regular stop on your daily routine. I mean, I am sure you don’t actually go around finding out who cites your blog, simply to attack them… or do you? LOL

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2006/05/26/BL2006052600966_pf.html