Iraqi update
sabadabada
5,966 Posts
Democrats claim that Iraqi army troops aren't being trained fast enough, but after seeing them train in this video even fatback nd motown will admit that victory is within our reach?
Comments
Is Violence Down Since The Surge?
When General Petraeus testified to Congress in September claiming that violence was dramatically down in Iraq, it set off a minor controversy. Some challenged his numbers, while others held them up to say that the surge was working. A analysis of military, think tank, and press reports show that the military is playing with the numbers, but that overall violence is down in Iraq since the surge.
Controversy Over The Exact Numbers ???
No one disagrees that Iraq set a new record for violence by the end of 2006. After the February 2006 bombing of a Shiite shrine, militias such as Sadr???s Mahdi Army steadily increased their attacks upon Sunnis, reaching a crescendo in December. What happened in the country after President Bush announced the surge in January 2007 has been a matter of debate. In September General Petraeus claimed that violence was down 75% in Baghdad and 50% overall in the country. Several think tanks and newspaper articles challenged Petraeus??? numbers.
What they found brought up several important questions about how the U.S. military collects and reports on violence in Iraq. Kirk Johnson who was the deputy director of the office in the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad from 2006-2007 that collected this information and now works for the Heritage Foundation said that U.S. reporting on average misses 35-65% of the violence. That???s because it focuses upon sectarian violence, which is meaningless for homogenous communities like the Sunni west and Shiite south, it undercounts civilians because it doesn???t have the means to collect all the information, and doesn???t collect consistent information from areas under Iraqi control. Under Petraeus the military has been trying to refine their body counts, but intelligence officers in Baghdad who collect this information admit that many times it comes down to a subjective decision on whether a body found should be counted as a sectarian or regular murder. For example, if a body is found in an area that is known as a flashpoint between Sunnis and Shiites it is usually counted as a sectarian death. Likewise if it shows any signs of torture or being tied up it???s counted as sectarian. However if bodies are found in a largely peaceful area, it is usually not included. Likewise an even more complicated occasion is when a body is found and there is no way to tell which sect it belongs to. The soldiers then have to make an educated guess as to the cause of death and whether to count it or not.
Another difference found was between what the Pentagon reported to Congress in September and what Petraeus presented that same month. A Pentagon report had a chart on average daily deaths and wounding of U.S. and Iraqi forces, and civilians, while a Petraeus??? chart covered sectarian deaths per month. While the two had different kinds of information, the general trends should???ve followed the same pattern with the Pentagon report having higher numbers than Petraeus because it was covering more people. However, Petraeus numbers were much higher before the surge, and much lower since the summer.
A more disturbing finding is that the Pentagon has been systematically ignoring the greatest single cause of sectarian deaths in Iraq until September 2007. The Department of Defense is required to deliver quarterly reports to Congress on progress in Iraq. In 2007 there have been three reports in March, June, and September. Each one of these reports has revised its numbers upwards over the same months for violence in Iraq. The military admitted that the reason why violence went up in the September report from the previous two was because it was the first to include car and suicide bombings. These are the major causes of mass casualties yet they were never included before.
From this analysis it???s pretty clear that the U.S. military has been systematically undercounting the violence in Iraq. Part of it is caused by having to collect information during a war with limited manpower. Another major cause has to be political pressure. It???s hard to say that the U.S. is winning and that Iraq is moving towards a functioning democracy with so much death and destruction constantly being reported. There has been a huge drop in public support for the war at home as a result, and therefore it would only be natural to start playing with the numbers to defer criticism.
??? But Trends In Violence Decreasing
Despite the controversy over the exact numbers and how they???re collected in Iraq, the general trends show that violence is down since the surge. The Council on Foreign Relations released a report comparing reports by General Petreaus, Iraqcasualties.org, Iraq Body Count, the Associated Press, Reuters, the U.N., the Brookings Institutions??? Iraq Index, the Washington Post, and McClatchy Newspapers. All of the reporting follows the same general trends: violence increased during 2006 with a high during the winter, and then decreased during 2007. Violence is still above 2006, but if the numbers continue to decline they will reach that level eventually. The one major difference is that four of the six sources record an increase in violence since June, while the military and Washington Post show a continued decrease. Whether this upward trend proves true will take until 2008 to determine because the numbers are always changing, and two months are a small fraction of an entire year.
What is now up for debate is the cause for this general decrease in violence in Iraq. When Petraeus reported to Congress he was careful to say that the surge has only been one factor for the decline. It???s without argument that an increase in U.S. forces, especially with the new task of protecting the population has decreased violence in the areas where they have control, which is about 50% of the capitol. Another reason that has been brought up is the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad. With the majority of Sunnis having been forced out, there are simply fewer Sunnis to kill. Another probable cause for the decrease was the decision by Moqtada al-Sadr to stand down his Mahdi Army militia in January when the surge was announced. He made the tactical decision to stand out of the way of the new U.S. policy because he hoped it would focus on the Sunnis, and allow him to take over more of the capitol. The largest drop in violence actually happened from December 2006 to February 2007 before large numbers of additional troops were even sent to Iraq, so Sadr???s decision and ethnic cleansing were probably major causes in this change. It???s from a combination of all three of these factors that violence is down in Baghdad.
Conclusion
There will probably never be an accurate count of the violence in Iraq. Depending upon which source you ask, the numbers vary widely. For example, unofficially, the Iraqi Interior Ministry said that there was 2,318 civilians killed in August, up from 1,980 in July, while General Petraeus??? report to Congress said there were only around 1,500 in August. The causes for these discrepancies are three fold: a lack of personnel, the difficulties of counting dead during a war, and the pressure to keep the numbers down during an unpopular conflict. Despite these problems, violence does appear to be declining for the first half of 2007, however, it???s still above 2006 levels. Whether this trend will continue is an open question, especially because the surge will end by early 2008. While sectarian violence appears to be down in central Iraq, the country is always changing with Sunnis fighting Sunnis in the West and Shiites increasingly fighting Shiites in the South. How the U.S. deals with these will be the major issue in 2008 and beyond.
SOURCES
Government Reports:
Department of Defense, ???Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq,??? September 2007
Fischer, Hannah, ???Iraqi Civilian Deaths Estimates,??? Congressional Research Service, 9/5/07
National Inte lligence Council, ???Prospects for Iraq???s Stability: Some Security Progress but Political Reconciliation Elusive,??? National Intelligence Estimate, August 2007
Think Tank Reports:
Biddle, Stephen Friedman, Jeffrey, ???The Iraq Data Debate Civilian Casualties from 2006 to 2007,??? Council on Foreign Relations, 9/25/07
Bruno, Greg, ???Iraq Security Statistics,??? Council on Foreign Relations, 9/12/07
Cordesman, Anthony, ???Iraq???s Insurgency and Civil Violence,??? Center for Strategic and International Studies, 8/22/07
Johnson, Kirk, ???Understanding Violence and Civilian Casualty Rates in Iraq: An Insider???s View,??? Heritage Foundation, 9/10/07
Goldenberg Ilan, ???More Fuzziness,??? DemocracyArsenal.org, 8/30/07
Korb, Lawrence Biddle, Stephen, ???Violence by the Numbers in Iraq: Sound Data or Shaky Statistics???? Council on Foreign Relations, 9/25/07
National Security Network, ???Drop in Violence???? 8/30/07
Articles
Ambramowitz, Michael and DeYoung, Karen, ???Petraeus Disappointed At Political State of Iraq,??? Washington Post, 9/8/07
DeYoung, Karen, ???Experts Doubt Drop In Violence in Iraq,??? Washington Post, 9/6/07
- ???What Defines a Killing as Sectarian???? Washington Post, 9/25/07
DeYoung, Karen and Tyson, Ann Scott, ???Military Officials in Iraq Fault GAO Report,??? Washington Post, 9/5/07
Fadel, Leila, ???Despite violence drop, officers see bleak future for Iraq,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 8/15/07
- ???Security in Iraq still elusive,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 9/7/07
Glanz, James, ???Civilian Death Toll Falls in Baghdad but Rises Across Iraq,??? New York Times, 9/2/07
Gordon, Michael, ???Hints of Progress, and Questions, in Iraq Data,??? New York Times, 9/8/07
Hurst, Steven, ???Violence lessens in Baghdad as it grows elsewhere,??? San Francisco Chronicle, 8/26/07
Lardner, Richard, ???Defense agency chart shows scant progress,??? San Francisco Chronicle, 9/10/07
Michaels, Jim, ???Major attacks decline in Iraq,??? USA Today, 8/13/07
Reid, Robert, ???August particularly deadly for Iraqis,??? San Francisco Chronicle, 9/2/07
Sudarsan, Raghavan, ???No Relief From Fear,??? Washington Post, 9/5/07
Susman, Tina, ???Troop buildup fails to reconcile Iraq,??? Los Angeles Times, 9/4/07
- ???U.S. defends sectarian death figures,??? Los Angeles Times, 9/13/07
Youssef, Nancy and Fadel, Leila, ???What Crocker and Petraeus didn???t say,??? McClatchy Newspapers, 9/10/07
Iraqi Casualty Numbers Part II
When Petraeus testified to Congress in September 2007 he claimed that Iraqi casualties were down 45% from December 2006 to August 2007. What he failed to mention was that these numbers were provisional and likely to increase, cutting into his claim of a reduction in violence.
Pentagon???s Revised Numbers
The Pentagon is required to provide a quarterly report to Congress entitled ???Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq.??? The reports include a chart on sectarian deaths in the country. From the first reports to March 2007 these numbers were basically static with no changes for earlier months. Then, suddenly with the June 2007 report, the old numbers started increasing dramatically. The Pentagon gave various reasons, but the main one was that they were backlogged with casualty reports and had just began to catch up. Since older numbers are constantly revised upwards, the result is that the newest monthly death counts are always lower than previous ones. Hence, when Petraeus said that sectarian violence was down 45% that was probably true for that week, but within the following months those casualty numbers would most likely increase as in previous Pentagon reports. The difference has been a 5-70% increase in deaths so the numbers Petraeus used will not exist later on.
Here???s a breakdown of the difference in death counts from the March, June and September 2007 Pentagon reports showing the inflation in numbers. All the numbers are approximate because no specifics are provided by the Defense Department.
Sectarian Murders June 2006 - January 2007: March 2007 / June 2007/ September 2007
June 2006: 990 / 1000 / 1200
July 2006: 1190 / 1390 / 1600
August 2006: 750 / 900 / 1100
September 2006: 1190 / 1210 / 1250
October 2006: 1010 / 1600 / 1700
November 2006: 1410 / 1950
December 2006: 1610 / 2100
January 2007: 1500 / 1800
Sectarian Murders February - April 2007 June 2007 Report / September 2007 Report
February 2007: 700 / 1200
March 2007: 600 / 1050
April 2007: 610 / 1050
Sectarian Murders May ??? August 2007 September 2007 Report
May 2007 1050
June 750
July 1060
August 900
Sources
Defense Department, ???Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq,??? March 2007
- ???Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq,??? June 2007
- ???Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq,??? September 2007
SECURING, STABILIZING, AND REBUILDING IRAQ
GAO Audits and Key Oversight Issues
Testimony Before the Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on State, Foreign Operations, and Related Programs, U.S. House of Representatives
Government Accountability Office
10/31/07
In late August 2007, Iraq???s senior Shi???a and Sunni Arab and Kurdish political leaders signed a unity accord signaling efforts to foster greater national reconciliation. The accord covered draft legislation on de-Ba???athification reform and provincial powers laws, and established a mechanism to release some Sunni detainees being held without charges. However, these laws have not been passed as of October 25, 2007.
No, we only deal with facts not neo-con fantasies here.
its just all out criminal - fascisist - bloodthirsty - war profiteers now.
get with the pg
It's a proven fact that reality has a liberal bias and this is just another example of it! - Colbert
Gotta keep busy.
I guess when you're not a flaming idiot you can understand that 14 is different from 0. [psst, it's bigger] 14 in this first week of November. 6 from yesterday. Nice try. You're pitiful.
DoD Fatalities
Mar-03 65
Apr-03 74
May-03 37
Jun-03 30
Jul-03 48
Aug-03 35
Sep-03 31
Oct-03 44
Nov-03 82
Dec-03 40
Jan-04 47
Feb-04 20
Mar-04 52
Apr-04 135
May-04 80
Jun-04 42
Jul-04 54
Aug-04 66
Sep-04 80
Oct-04 64
Nov-04 137
Dec-04 72
Jan-05 107
Feb-05 58
Mar-05 35
Apr-05 52
May-05 80
Jun-05 78
Jul-05 54
Aug-05 85
Sep-05 49
Oct-05 96
Nov-05 84
Dec-05 68
Jan-06 62
Feb-06 55
Mar-06 31
Apr-06 76
May-06 69
Jun-06 61
Jul-06 43
Aug-06 65
Sep-06 72
Oct-06 106
Nov-06 70
Dec-06 112
Jan-07 83
Feb-07 81
Mar-07 81
Apr-07 104
May-07 126
Jun-07 101
Jul-07 78
Aug-07 84
Sep-07 65
Oct-07 38
Nov-07 14[/b]
So how many dead ones on your little excel sheet before you post? Do you set the cut-off at 10?
Now, instead of carrying water for the GOP extremists, you're just rambling nonsense. That's actually better.
cause operation iragi liberation has been a huge flaming success!
It's really about me because they are a cult of defamation in an age of retards. As such, this short sited power-grab strategy is enabled by keeping it personal instead of discussing the concepts.
please to get over yourself.
Then stop hollerin' at my dick.
I wasn't.
This was a special present for Motown, but you just couldn't reseist sticking your dick in it.
I know you love it. And I kinda feel sorry for you.
go eat some chinese toys.
What's your take on the latest revelations about NSA and AT&T? I have always tried to downplay the conspiracy aspect of the administration's failed approach to the war on terror but this shit is just downright criminal and scary. It's the kind of move that a totalitarian gov't would endorse. More and more, I am begin to believe that this war really is about oil.
how does telephone tapping lead you to a war-for-oil conclusion.
What do you think about the domestic wire tapping?
clearly.
US deaths down in recent months, but 2007 deadliest year for US troops. That sounds like one of those liberal facts. Sab only wants to hear about victory!
Surge aimed at Iraqis anways, not US casualties. That would mean sab cares about Iraqs. Pfff. America #1!
Sab claims victory in national reconciliation. August government promise reconciliation. Sab why didn't you tell us this was the 4th to 6th time they make promises dating back to 2006? If making promises but doing nothing is victory, US won before surge started!
Besides, surge not about that anymore. Bush changed goal to bottom up reconciliation now. US working with Sunni tribes and insurgents to fight bad guys Al Qaeda. GAO say US has no plan for how to make bottom up work. GAO must hate America!
Is bottom up happpening? Shiite government refusing to hire Sunnis organized by US, government sending Shiite police to Sunni areas causing trouble, main Shiite coalition United Alliance tells US to stop Sunn policy. Sab don't care. Al Qaeda is on the run. Why didn't sab tell us they were on run before surge started? Us winning before surge!
Sunnis say go fight Shiites and baghdad next. US general say unless government reach out to sunnis soon things could fall apart. General must be liberal.
Sunnis have reason to hate shiites, shiites still ethnic cleansing Sunnis from Baghdad. Sab's wall st. journal even report it. Sab must have missued issue. Besides US not report on ethnic cleansing. If not good for US military, not good for sab.
Iraqi government claim more Iraqi refugees returning. Sab says surge must be working! Don't say Arab countries kicking out Iraqis. Don't say more internally displaced Iraqis. Maybe ethnic cleansing? No, must be liberals. Sab don't care about Iraqis anyways.
Shiites fighting Shiites in South too. Sadr take over Karbala, fight security forces and SIIC. Government still has no control. US don't count Shiite on shiite violence though, Sab don't count either.
Turks mad at Kurdish PKK. US says they terrorists, but they also attack Iran. US supports terrorism if against Iran, do nothing about PKK. Turks not Americans anyway, so sab don't care about them either.
Sab says US winning, all that matters! Just like claiming US winning in 2006, Hell, US winning before surge start! USA #1.
Please to provide names so Dr.Wu can scribble them on Portland sidewalks this weekend and feel good about self.