January 16, 2006
Despite Perception, Progress
The perception is that the war in Iraq was “bigger or more deadly” for the US in 2005 than 2004. Nope.
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
USA Today : The number of U.S. troops wounded in Iraq fell by more than a quarter in 2005 from a year earlier,Â… Â…Army Maj. Gen. William Webster, the commander of U.S. forces in Baghdad, said the number of suicide car bombs and roadside bombs fell by half during 2005. Only about 10% of insurgent attacks cause injuries or damage now, down from about 25% a year agoÂ…Â…U.S. military leaders say that one of the biggest changes was in the number and quality of Iraqi forces. About three dozen Iraqi battalions, each with about 700 soldiers, are taking the lead in battling insurgents, said Army Lt. Gen. John Vines, commander of multinational forces in Iraq. There were no such battalions in early 2005, he said.
However deaths were only down by one at 844. Hard fought steady progress I reckon.
This belies the notion spread by Democrats such as Jack Murtha that Americans have been increasingly targeted by insurgents and terrorists in Iraq.
Posted by: Howie at
09:03 PM
| Comments (22)
| Add Comment
Post contains 194 words, total size 1 kb.
1
"This belies the notion spread by Democrats such as Jack Murtha that Americans have been increasingly targeted by insurgents and terrorists in Iraq."
Number of attacks down, but number of US dead the same? Sounds like an increasing proportion of attacks are directed at us.
Posted by: actus at January 16, 2006 09:23 PM (TEHSD)
2
Read the damn article actus before you make a stupid comment.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 16, 2006 09:53 PM (rUyw4)
3
844 deaths in 2005? That's nothing compared to 2002. We lost 17638 back then. That's apples and oranges of course, because the '02 casualties are from homicide in the U.S. (source: CDC) Which goes to show how effective the insurgents are compared with our thugs. Let's pull out the troops, empty our prisons into Iraq, and watch the Crips go to work!
I got that figure when I was looking to put the casualty figures in perspective, something the press has never done since Korea. Absolute numbers say nothing about the success of a military action. You're bound to lose some people; the question is how many are too many? Is 844 deaths a lot for a year's worth of counterinsurgency? It doesn't hold a candle to Vietnam--we'd have to keep the troops there till they died of old age to touch Vietnam's death toll.
Still, it would be bad to get people expecting "progress" out of our occupation. If you could pacify people by sending infantry partols through town, we ought to occupy Detroit not Baghdad.
Posted by: ShannonKW at January 16, 2006 10:25 PM (dT1MB)
4
"That's apples and oranges of course, because the '02 casualties are from homicide in the U.S. (source: CDC) Which goes to show how effective the insurgents are compared with our thugs. Let's pull out the troops, empty our prisons into Iraq, and watch the Crips go to work!"
Are you sure the populations are comparable? the 300 million in the US vs. the 100K or so in iraq?
Posted by: actus at January 16, 2006 10:43 PM (TEHSD)
5
Let's not forget the 30,000 or so who die in car crashes every year too, those are also part of a Halliburton plot, no doubt. Don't bother trying to convince morons like rectus, they refuse to see the facts.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 16, 2006 11:00 PM (0yYS2)
6
"Don't bother trying to convince morons like rectus, they refuse to see the facts."
And the math too. Don't forget refusal to do math.
Posted by: actus at January 16, 2006 11:17 PM (TEHSD)
7
actus,
Of course they aren't, hence the "apples and oranges reference." I was giving an absurd example of the silliness that using statistics without context leads to.
I work in a hospital so I get to see a lot of waste and foolishness over mortality statistics in particular. The CDC people dropped by a couple months ago to pump us up for influenza vaccination. It seems the flu kills 3 times as many people as AIDS, but because AIDS deaths make headlines and flu deaths don't, we're spendinging a king's ransom to develop an AIDS vaccine but only 40% of us bother to get a flu shot.
Rather than freaking out over 2000 deaths, we ought to be asking if 2000 is too many for what we are trying to do in Iraq. I haven't heard anyone in the last 2 years ask that question of the sort of person who would know the answer.
Posted by: ShannonKW at January 16, 2006 11:25 PM (dT1MB)
8
"Rather than freaking out over 2000 deaths, we ought to be asking if 2000 is too many for what we are trying to do in Iraq"
That's what most people do address.
Posted by: actus at January 17, 2006 12:26 AM (TEHSD)
9
http://www.sftt.org/main.cfm?actionId=globalShowStaticContent&screenKey=cmpDefense&htmlCategoryID=30&htmlId=4514
Turns out that fatalities might be lower if soldiers were not being told to forego personally bought protection like Dragon Skin....
Posted by: 8ackgr0und N015e at January 17, 2006 12:54 AM (K5Ko+)
10
"the 300 million in the US vs. the 100K or so in iraq?"
Since when is Iraq's population 100K?
Posted by: Oyster at January 17, 2006 05:38 AM (YudAC)
11
Background- it's my understanding that the armor is heavy and very hot. There's still quite a bit of contention over its actual performance.
Posted by: Oyster at January 17, 2006 06:33 AM (YudAC)
12
Over at the "Opinionated B" blog he has a breakdown of
the decrease in Iraqi deaths over these years.
http://www.opinionatedbastard.com/archives/000710.html#more
Also points out that the number of successful terrorist attacks have dropped from 25% to 10%.
Posted by: This&That at January 17, 2006 08:36 AM (MSMPS)
13
"Since when is Iraq's population 100K?"
Iraq's american servicementer population is about 100K. That's the number to use when talking about US servicemember deaths.
But I think it would be useful to find out the overall death rate for iraq. It would be higher than here.
Posted by: actus at January 17, 2006 08:47 AM (TEHSD)
14
actus: Even after Shannon clarified the "apples and oranges" statement, you continue to try and make comparisons. Why would it be proper, and what would it prove, to compare service member deaths in Iraq to the entire population of the US? It would be more correct to compare it to comparable career fields in the US. Say, all policemen, fire department personnel and other similar job related deaths compared to that of the soldier in Iraq. I don't have the numbers - I'm just sayin'.
The overall death rate in Iraq, as pertaining to casualties of the war, is pretty well estimated on the web. Don't make us do your homework for you. Sometimes I get the impression you comment without checking sources, documentation or facts. Why would I get that impression?
Posted by: Oyster at January 17, 2006 09:17 AM (osKlJ)
15
"Why would it be proper, and what would it prove, to compare service member deaths in Iraq to the entire population of the US? "
It wouldn't. That's my point. The guy is comparing raw death numbers of americans in iraq vs. americans in the US. You need a proper denominator to make those comparisons. A death rate.
Posted by: actus at January 17, 2006 09:53 AM (CqheE)
16
It doesn't matter with actus. No matter what you say, he will disagree. The facts speak. The number of attacks are down and the number of casualties are down. The deaths are still about the same, due to more effective ordonance(shaped charges) probably provided by Iran. Now what is it you don't understand about this, actus?
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 17, 2006 10:27 AM (rUyw4)
17
Rectus masturbates to a pictures of Osama and the Blackwater contractors' dead bodies hanging from the bridge in Fallujah. He is a piece of shit terrorist sympathizer and should be arrested, tried, and executed for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
You hear that you piece of shit? I would pay my life's savings to pull the trigger myself.
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at January 17, 2006 11:52 AM (0yYS2)
18
actus, hence his following "apples to oranges" comment. Get it?
Posted by: Oyster at January 17, 2006 11:59 AM (osKlJ)
19
I know the home address of Actus. IM what exactly are you offering as life savings.Would this include IRA 401 etc ?
Posted by: john Ryan at January 17, 2006 12:20 PM (TcoRJ)
20
"He is a piece of shit terrorist sympathizer and should be arrested, tried, and executed for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
You hear that you piece of shit? I would pay my life's savings to pull the trigger myself."
Oh quit whining and do it already.
Posted by: actus at January 17, 2006 01:57 PM (CqheE)
21
Hehehe! Ya'll are funny.
IM, let up on actus, he admitted he was a pinko communist homo! If you were a Christian, I would advise you to pray for him, but since you are an atheist, I really don't know what to tell you.
Posted by: jesusland joe at January 17, 2006 04:59 PM (rUyw4)
22
You can't be 53528 serious?!?
Posted by: Max Ballstein at July 07, 2006 02:52 PM (LHjvs)
27kb generated in CPU 0.0153, elapsed 0.1003 seconds.
118 queries taking 0.0916 seconds, 266 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
118 queries taking 0.0916 seconds, 266 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
