Thursday, October 18, 2007
# Posted 9:09 PM by Ariel David Adesnik
Recently, IBC faced quite a dilemma. By early September, its data had begun to show a correlation between the surge of US forces and a visible reduction in the number of Iraqi civilians being killed. Remarkably, this development led IBC to worry that the anti-war left might consider it a shill for the Bush administration. In its defense, IBC explained that it:
...is aware that official reports are imminent concerning the progress of the US Government’s New Security Plan or ‘surge.’ However, IBC’s work is not linked to the political calendar, and the charts above are not intended to be directly comparable to data which may be supplied from official sources.You have to give IBC credit for hoping that enough Iraqis would die to discredit the surge. Sadly the terrorists and death squads failed to deliver. And the statistics from October aren't any better, even according to IBC. If you add up IBC's list of recent events, the total so far this month is around 600. Still horrific, but a far cry from the numbers of this spring or last fall.
Now, it's worth keeping in mind that accurate statistics about the civilian death toll are hard to come by. iCasualties, another site with no sympathies for the US war effort, list the current October toll at just over 400. For a look at the challenge of compiling such gruesome and tragic statistics, I highly recommend a recent column by Clark Hoyt, the NYT's public editor.
In closing, it is worth keeping mind a good point made by IBC, a point that has merit in spite of its authors' agenda:
It is important to place the events of 2007 in context. Levels of violence reached an all-time high in the last six months of 2006. Only in comparison to that could the first half of 2007 be regarded as an improvementWe should never forget how much Iraqis have suffered because of our failures as an occupying power. The actual killers were Sunni terrorists and Shi'ite death squads, but a successful occupation could have saved thousands and thousands of lives. (8) opinions -- Add your opinion
There was a report that either today or yesterday there were zero roadside bombs exploded in Iraq, and zero bodies found... What on earth are these people going to do on days when there is simply no violence? Just report bombs in Pakistan instead, I guess, and hope nobody notices any difference. It appears that by failing to notice Iraq is calm and stable--on one day or one week or whatever--the liberal media can postpone delivering any news we have won the war. They can fight such rearguard action for another 13 months, but the genie figures to be out of the bottle by November '08. You would think it might be better for them to report victory sooner rather than later, throwing the helm all the way over tout de suite, in hopes that by election day the public won't remember where they have been the past five year. But their problem is they can't believe it. They swallowed the defeatist hemlock months or years ago, and cannot reverse its course. They now find they must try to ignore the war until after the election, hoping to sneak by without losing political control, after which they can cavalierly enjoy the strategic advantage flowing from Bush's brilliant decision to invade Iraq.
What on earth are these people going to do on days when there is simply no violence?
Anon, This is an Iraqi news sources , the list for this month i.e. from 1st of October till 19th of October (Arabic txt) there is no single day said there are no killing or arrest or car bombing.
Be sure your media biased and filtered and it’s washing your brain as they do four years ago when they start this war.
Lawyers take MoD to court over Iraqi mutilation claims
What about these hidden acts?
This paragraph saddens me:
"We should never forget how much Iraqis have suffered because of our failures as an occupying power. The actual killers were Sunni terrorists and Shi'ite death squads, but a successful occupation could have saved thousands and thousands of lives."
Our failures? A Succesful occupation? The middle east has been immersed in a decades long deathfest. The situation in Iraq shows how much hate exists in the area. No earthly power could have prevented the bloodshed. Indeed the bloodshed did not start with the occupation.
As long as the intevening powers are blamed for all the problems then you will have no intervention by powers that are sensitive to international opinion. Care to guess how well that would work?
The middle east has been immersed in a decades long deathfest. The situation in Iraq shows how much hate exists in the area.
Tim H, did Iraqis invite you to their deathfest?
Off course apart from those gangs of thieves and lair like Chalabi, Hakem and others you know them well
Tim H.: Agreed. I doubt anything really could have kept the bloodshed from occurring, once the removal of Saddam opened the gates for decades of frustration, fear and rage to vent. Hopefully, that initial outburst is now spent, and the Iraqis can begin to settle down and enjoy the blessings and responsibilities of being masters of their own fates.
'did Iraqis invite you to their deathfest?'Post a Comment
Saddam did it for them. By refusing to live peacefully with his neighbors and keeping the region destabilized so that it became a breeding ground for terrorists who washed up on our shores, he made it incumbent on us to take action.
If you don't like it, blame Saddam. He's more likely to care about what you think than I do. You can reach him in Hell. Interdimensional phone rates apply so, you better keep the conversation short.