One could even highlight the stupidity of his argument further. Let's restrict the California stats down to the numbers of police officers killed in the line of duty, including all causes (car accidents, hostile fire, etc.). We will find that in California, 166 police officers have died in the line of duty.....
....since 1991! Since the number of US soldiers who have died in the line of duty in Iraq is damned close to that number for the period of May 2 - present, Brit seems to have some difficulty. Can any one get the total number of police officers in the state of California (ideally, historical information, so one can average the total over the period 1991 - 2003 current)? I've been looking all over for it, and haven't found it, even at Justice.
Source: California Peace Officer Memorial
http://www.camemorial.org/Now, let's take the argument the other way. Another group Brit leaves out of his calculation is the total number of PEOPLE (including Iraqi civilians, Iraqi resistance, aid workers, journalists, etc.) who have died through hostile action (attacks, bombings, action by the US/UK colonizing forces, crime) for the period May 2 - present. Of course, Brit would never give a stat on that, supposing the so-called Coalition Provisional Authority or anyone else even keeps such numbers, since it would clearly signal the failure of the US/UK colonizing forces to maintain even minimum standards of order.
As it stands, Brit is making a false comparison on any number of fronts: the function of US soldiers v. the function of the CA general population, the general population of CA is compared not to the general population of Iraq, but to a different (smaller) comparison group (apples and oranges fallacy), etc.
The man is either a liar or a fool. I'd stick with the former, since no school child of twelve could be so clueless about basic logic.