"Surge" Report Card Not Good-"Metrics" of Surge Show Reverse Effect And Widening Conflict

[babylonsister]

http://www.iraqslogger.com/index.php/post/3047/Surge_Report_Card_Not_Good

"Surge" Report Card Not Good
"Metrics" of Surge Show Reverse Effect And Widening Conflict
By ROBERT Y. PELTON Posted 1 hr. 47 min. ago



Its only June and initial statistics are showing the Iraqi civilian deaths for May are up almost 30% over last month at 1,944. Fighting is intense in Western Baghdad despite the increased troop and police numbers and murders attributed to sectarian violence have tripled. Iraqi police estimate that pre-surge estimates were around ten a day and now they average 30 a day. All at a time that the U.S. military insists that Iraqi civilian casualties due to sectarian violence are down. Who should we believe in this reverse Vietnam-era body count game?

Every indication seems to point to dramatically increased levels of violence and capability amongst violent groups inside and outside iraq. U.S. military deaths hit 124 in May and even contractor deaths have increased dramatically although there is no hard data for judging the exact number of contractor casualties (146 since January) or even the total number of contractors now closer to our original estimate of over 120,000. Everything is surging in Iraq.

There has been no data to indicate a decrease in car bombings, mortar attacks or violent incidents since the "Surge" began. The military has insisted that the true effect of the surge will not be known for many months and not even by the much touted September milestone.

In an time when "metrics" or hard data is in vogue used to gauge success or failure of actions there has actually been a restriction of data. The Iraqi government initially accused the UN of exaggerating the death toll and then refused to release figures. Then journalists were banned from covering violent attacks "for their own safety"

The idea that the insurgents are increasing activity to defuse the U.S. move is a credible scenario but in places like Diyala and Al Anbar province the surge is a non event. There is increased fighting with Iraqi on Iraqi violence being promoted by the creation of local militias. Even the Mahdi army which was magically tamed to coincide with the surge is gearing up for a fight now that Moqtada is back. Life in Baghdad has not been better, it is just the sound of waiting for the other shoe to drop. Electricity, fuel and other basics are in short supply, checkpoints make movement more difficult. Bridges are beginning to be taken out, creating problems for rapid reaction or movement of police.

more...

[bluerum]

1. Send more troops into a war zone and expect peace to break out.

Did this ever make any sense?

[Quantess]

6. Give war a chance, dude.

You're too impatient 'n shit.

[Toots]

13. Seemed to work in WW II especially with the invasion of Normandy

The fallicy with what you said is "war zone". There is no war.. There is an occupation that is being contested by civilians and they are fighting all those that are aiding the occupying forces. It isn't that hard to figure out. If we truly were at war then increasing troops would be the exact best thing possible. That is why they institute a draft during real wars.. This is a fake war run by a fake pResident..

[bluerum]

14. Yeah. And Viet Nam was a police action. If it walks like a duck,,,, eom

[Toots]

16. At least in Vietnam we were engaged against the third largest army in the world at the time.

We were up against fortified bunkers and uniformed conventional troops with modern weapons, hell they even used tanks against Khe Sahn. And yes even that was not really a "war" but a "Conflict". We never really lost a battle there but because we were in the wrong it was a "Conflict" that Americans could never win. It was between the Vietnamese people and America had no right to be there. This thing in Iraq isn't even close to Vietnam let alone WW II.

[bluerum]

18. Not in magnitude. Nor in mobilization of the homeland. But our guys

are getting killed just the same.

[aquart]

2. I'm shocked. Shocked.

[samplegirl]

3. This war is doing nothing

but draining us.

[babylonsister]

4. Yes, and getting people maimed and killed on both sides. nt

[whistle]

5. Give Bush's surge 19 months it will really turn into a major cluster fuck!

....stop the war now and bring the troops home

[HCE SuiGeneris]

7. We all knew it was a deadly con, as did the neofascist GOP bastards

yet we remain docile hoping for our Reps to grow cajones... :banghead:

[HCE SuiGeneris]

8. As an aside...

Babylonsister, you are amazing in your fiercely directed focus to keep us all informed with the current news. Thank you! :hug:

[babylonsister]

9. ...

:*

[ConsAreLiars]

10. So, breaking down more doors, killing more people, and playing Gestapo

doesn't make the people of Iraq happier and more content? No surprise, but the fascists seem to think that mass murderer and high-tech terrorism will give them absolute power over the common people, us mere proles.

[cassiepriam]

11. It is becoming apparent that this is exactly what Bush wanted. The war to widen to the whole Mideast

But WHY???

[HCE SuiGeneris]

12. morning kick

[Blackhatjack]

15. Didn't You Get the Memo? Sept is not enough time to measure results...

just give them the same amount of time needed in Korea, then we will know if it is working.

[Poiuyt]

17. Petraeus has already decided he's going to call the surge a success in September

Petraeus has already decided he's going to call the surge a success in September
by John Aravosis (DC) · 6/01/2007 07:25:00 PM ET

An incredibly disturbing story from ABC News (this link is now suspiciously dead - I've posted the story below). Basically, General Petraeus has already decided that the surge in Iraq will be such a resounding success come September that we're going to keep the surge troops there another four months beyond when we were told they were needed. Did you get that? The mission is such a success that it's going to take twice as long. Now that's a man who knows how to spin.

But it's even better than that. We been told forever that it would just impossible to tell if the surge is working until September or even later because, you know, the surge troops wouldn't even all be in Iraq until July. Now, per ABC, Petraeus is telling people he already knows what he's going to report in September - that the surge has been a huge success. Which is a bit odd, since the last of the surge troops only just arrived in Iraq a day or two ago (yeah, they lied about July). Yet now we suddenly already know how successful we'll by September even though we were told that September would likely be too early to tell. It's all one big joke for Petraeus and Bush. Not to mention, I love that Petraeus and Bush basically misled the entire Congress last week. Congress just gave him $100 billion for Iraq based on the latest, best briefings on what was going on. Unless Petraeus told Congress last week that he already had determined that the surge would be a success in September, he misled them. He held back information that they needed to know in order to properly fund this war.

more -

http://www.americablog.com/2007/06/petraeus-has-already-decided-hes-going.html

[Jack Rabbit]

19. And in September

Regardless of any emperical evidence to the contrary, the surge will be called a success and those saying otherwise will be called terrorist sympathizers.

Imperial reasoning trumps emperical facts every time in Bush's America.