Saddam's hanging will not increase violence in Iraq

[antiimperialist]

Ramadan is coming. Violence will surge.
Zarqawi is dead. Prepare for more violence.
Be ready for Iraq violence as US. congressional elections approach.
The bombing of Samarrah holy shrine started the civil war.

These are only a few of the Iraq war myths and tricks spread by U.S. Military. They try to make us believe that violence at any given time is temporary, due to special events such of the islamic holy month, the killing of an highly-ranked insurgent, terrorist or one single bombing of one place.
This is not true. The truth is that violence has increased steadily, whether in the presence or abscence or any remarkable event.
My questions are:
why didn't violence settle down to pre-Islamic holy month levels after the last Islamic holy month? The White House did not seem to care to give us an explanation of this phenomenon

The elections are over. Are insurgents now bombing us and each other because of the 2008 elections? Obviously the answer is no.

Here is a graph from the group Iraq body count, which shows no spike after the Zarqawi death or any other event, including the month of Ramadan:




Violence has been STEADILY on the increase since the war started. The totality of abuses, torture, illegal invasion, rape, etc. has caused the chaos that reigns in Iraq today. Not a single event has or will be responbible for any surge of violence. You cannot piss off he who is already angry to the max. Iraq is a mess and it will stay that way. Period.

[babylonsister]

1. I think you're right, but standby to hear all about how much

worse it gets after the SOB is dead; that will give this admin justification for implementing whatever the hell lame-assed plan they have in mind.

[kentuck]

2. Saddam is a Sunni...

This would have a similar effect as the destruction of the mosque at Samarra, would be my guess. Because it is about Sunni vs Shia ...and that is much more serious than an election in this country.

[tridim]

3. Yep, Bush and the Neocons increased the violence in Iraq

And Bush is going to increase it even further with his magical Iraq plan next week.

[seriousstan]

4. Actually, your graph is almost linear, after the initial jump

that would mean that the violence is steady, not steadily increasing.

[antiimperialist]

5. True

Thanks for pointing that out. I didn't think about that.
Although my central point remains true.

[seriousstan]

6. Agreed, I don't expect any real up-tick in violence after the execution.

[SOS]

8. Re: the graph

The monthly death toll actually doubled from 1778 in January 2006 to 3,590 in July.

"Before 2006, the death toll includes only Iraqi deaths reported in the press. We now know that these figures missed at least half of the fatalities from January through June, 2006. The Iraqi government has now released a count based on hospitals and the Bahgdad morgue. These total 14,388, while deaths reported by the press total only 7024."

http://zfacts.com/p/458.html

[Cleita]

7. My thinking is that Saddam was not a beloved leader although

maybe some of his fellow Baathists might turn violent, there really isn't enough of them. So I don't think there will be an escalation of violence that wouldn't have happened anyway in spite of him. I object to his execution for other reasons.