And, quite impressively...
For the first time sine the war began the US military has released data on militants killed in Iraq.
USA Today reported:
More than 19,000 militants have been killed in fighting with coalition forces since the insurgency began more than four years ago, according to military statistics released for the first time.This is not good news for Michael Moore's Minutemen:
The statistics show that 4,882 militants were killed in clashes with coalition forces this year, a 25% increase over all of last year.
The increase in enemy deaths this year reflects more aggressive tactics adopted by American forces and an additional 30,000 U.S. troops ordered by the White House this year.
Via Iraq Coalition Casualty Count 9-27-2007.
And, to add insult to injury--
Fewer Saudis are choosing to explode in Iraq today.
It is truly a bad day for US democrats.
Oh... And, the US military had their lowest number of fatalities this month than they have had any month all year.
Body counts again?
ReplyDeleteSo I guess we have to learn this lesson twice, eh?
You're out of school early.
ReplyDeleteGlad to hear about the low casualties of US troops this month. Hopefully, the trend will continue.
ReplyDeleteI'm not sure what xanthippas' post was intended to convey, but if it's that insurgent body counts aren't really a clear indication of improvement in Iraq, then I've got to agree. A far better indicator is continued improvement of Iraq's economy, improvement of public services like fire/police/electricity, etc. etc. There have been recent reports indicating all these things have been improving as well.
I had my doubts for a while about our efforts (not that the efforts were wrong-headed, but that they might not work), and am sincerely hoping we've "turned the corner" as some have described it.
GP Says: "You're out of school early."
ReplyDeleteMust of cut his Statistics Class!
I don't think they have statistics class in middle school.
ReplyDeleteDid anyone else notice how they said it was "over 19,000" when describing the dead terrorists.
ReplyDeleteDo you suppose they would have used that same language if it would have been dead US soldiers or Iraqi civilians they were reporting on?
Well the only problem I see is that the number is three zeros shy of what it should be if we were serious about this war on terror...
ReplyDeleteDo we as a nation have to repeat the Roman lessons learned the hard way with their 3 Punic Wars?
Jim,
ReplyDeleteWhile important information, I have never found body counts like this to be a particularly useful metric of the war's effectiveness.
I am curious, though: How many Iraqi security forces on our side have been killed in that same time? How many Iraqi civilians?
Also, why do you use the word militants and terrorists as though they are interchangeable? Surely there is a difference.
Names! The media must have names, to honor the dead by scrolling the names of thousands and thousands of war dead so that the horror of war can be pounded into our thick, incurious heads....oh, yeah. Wrong guys.
ReplyDeleteProbably all named Mohammad anyway.
Never mind.
As Oyster at Final Draft noted:
ReplyDeleteThat comes to $50 million PER kill.
Those fiscal conservatives, got to hand it to them. They know how to keep a sharp eye on your tax dollars.
Watching them as they make their way into all the right pockets...
I believe the problem here is that I can't trust a military to know when a man is a terrorist and when a man is just a normal Iraqi trying to protect his home and family. Americans would do the same thing to protect their homes I'm sure. And even if the numbers are correct, are the millions we've spent on each one of those terrorists worth it?
ReplyDeleteEither way the conflict is going, you have to admit it has only harmed us. And it will continue to harm us regardless of how many terrorists we kill. Political reconciliation is the only answer.