Thank you for setting this race/class baiter straight. His numbers must be way down, for him to pull this.
I suspect that it's also that he's going on faulty information. The actual make-up of the volunteer military isn't really known to most people.
Though, there is one thing in favor of his argument. In the Gulf War, the combat arm guys took so few casualties that the casualties among the support types proportionately higher than one would expect. The Scud attack, crashes and other accidents, mine injuries, etc. probably caused more kills than the enemy in direct combat.
However, I doubt Kirk is making his argument based on such knowledge. More likely, he's going off the common mythology of Vietnam -- that poor dumb farm and ghetto kids did all the dying. But even that is wrong. I recall reading of a study in the past two years that pointed out that blacks didn't die in combat at a higher rate than their percentage of the military.
No kidding - I had to read the article twice just to be sure it was saying what it was. His statements on this issue show him to be so far out of touch that there is no way in Hell he should go to the US Senate. After all, he'd be in company just like himself in that chamber - out of touch with reality. Isn't there some way we can require the members of the Senate to take some form of civics and/or IQ test? Or just a generic lie detector test on ethics would be a good start. We need to return the Senate to where that chamber's members are chosen by the state representatives, not this system where it is the de facto House of Lords. These idiots do not represent their states in any way shape or form.