Keeping the goalposts in place
By Steve Benen Tuesday Jul 31, 2007 8:19pmU.S. troop casualties in Iraq declined slightly in July, dropping to 2006 levels for the month. There’s also some evidence that sectarian violence in Iraqi neighborhoods was vaguely less brutal in July than it was in previous months. Obviously, both of these trends are good news.
But let’s not forget the point of the current administration policy: U.S. forces are trying to provide stability necessary for political progress. In this sense, Iraq is getting worse, not better.
Iraq’s largest Sunni Arab political bloc announced its withdrawal from the government Wednesday, undermining efforts to seek reconciliation among the country’s rival factions, and three bombings in Baghdad killed at least 70 people.
Maliki’s “national unity” coalition is falling apart, and there’s ample talk that the Prime Minister may even be forced from office, thanks in part to the efforts of his predecessor, Ibrahim al-Jaafari.
As Marc Lynch explained, the deterioration of Iraqi political progress helps highlight the obvious failure of the administration’s stated policy.
Login or Register to post comments.
"But let’s not forget the point of the current administration policy:"
permanent bases and the ability to project power in the region forever. Its all about the hedgmony, baby...
remember, every time things slacken up a bit, it adds to the bush admins goal of staying in Iraq forever.
US troop casualties decreased slightly in July? Woohoo! We won! Let's declare victory and go home.
Gosh, you know... it IS really hot this time of year.
Maybe the "insurgents" are on holiday with Parliament. We should ask Tony Snow.
It's let the cards fall where they may at this point.
Always remember whenever you hear anything good or bad in Iraq:
Leaving. Was. Never. Part. Of. The. Plan. Ever.
...The Bush Cheney gang didn't lie their way into Iraq just to turn around and walk out on all that oil.
Day time temps are like 129 degrees out....who has the energy to set up ied's
Ruthless People @ 5:
PNAC Mission Statement. We're going to be the big swinging dicks.
"stability necessary for political progress"
This translates to 'kill every living thing', and then you see they are making progress.
Breaking News
Bridge collapses into Miss. River
AP - 54 minutes ago
MINNEAPOLIS - A freeway bridge spanning the Mississippi River collapsed during evening rush hour Wednesday, sending many cars into the water.
No our infrastructure isn't falling apart nope.
Ladies and Gentlemen, like the steam line break in NY, this event clearly shows how, under the republican war machine, America's infrastructure is falling apart due to lack of maintenance and funding. (Bridges falling apart, roads crumbling, sewer systems collapsing, steam lines exploding etc.) Get used to it all you supporters of republicans. If you are not a supporter of republicans, contact your elected officials and demand a change, if they do not do it, vote them out of office in November 2008.
I just came back from seeing No End In Sight at the Film Forum in New York. It clearly shows how US casualties are not a reliable barometer on how things are going in Iraq. Things have become worse every month since 2003. Everyone needs to see this movie. It spells out our entire Iraq legacy.
January 2009 is probably the date Chevron has penciled on their calendar to change the name of that oil tanker back to The Condelezza Rice. http://www.aztlan.net/oiltanker.htm
We ain't going anywhere until every drop of middle east oil is gone I don't care how many innocent Americans have to loose their lives in terrorist attacks, or how much we have to pay in taxes to supplement these oil wars, because of these lying, greedy, warmongering, criminal, thugs.
L.A. Confidential @ 10:
I hope there weren't any Democrats that fell in the river. We voted for infrastructure.
Ruthless People @ 13:
Fill their stomachs and empty their brains. Sign em up and ship em out.
or . . . "I want to do whats right for America" GWB
L.A. Confidential @ 11:
and let's not forget the Northeast blackout of several years ago now a distant memory.
Maliki has called for Patraeus to be removed:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/07/28/wirq128.xml
So ... does Maliki get capped like Ngo Diem did in Vietnam? Or thrown out?
L.A. Confidential @ 15:
Sorry LAC, I'm going to doctor your quote a bit - "I wunna doo whuts rite fur Amerka" - G W Moron.
"Success is not no violence." ...thats boosh's benchmark.
According to Juan Cole's "Informed Comment" site, the Pentagon's claim that U.S. military deaths declined in July and therefore signifies something meaningful is mere sleight of hand. While the number of casualties declined from June, they increased nearly 100% from July 2006, as did the overall number of attacks on U.S. forces in June 2007. No matter how you slice or dice it, the truth is that the escalation is having no meaningful impact on the situation. Here's a quote from Cole:
"Pentagon spokesmen are attempting to portray this near doubling of July troop deaths [from 2006 to 2007] as a sign of improvement on the security side, counting from June rather than looking at past July figures-- and I fear some corporate media are falling for it."
C&L readers shouldn't fall for it either. And meanwhile, the putative goal of the "surge" - to create breathing room for the Iraqi government to come up with a political solution - has been an utter failure, as a major Sunni political party withdrew from the government and the rest of the American sock-puppets left "town" on vacation, presumably to London and Geneva.
crooksandliars got a mention on fox today:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g22KvXpYuuA
Wow, even the insurgents have taken a break from the 125 degree heat.
puppet governments don't last long in war zones.
Here's your casualty "decline":
'Coalition' Combat deaths in Iraq:
July 2007: 86 (2,77 per day)
July 2006: 46 (1,48 per day)
July 2005: 58 (1,87 per day)
July 2004: 58 (1,87 per day)
July 2003: 49 (1,58 per day)
They keep wanting to ping pong between "declined from last month" and "the surge will spur additional violence" depending on the day.
[...] House Contact the Webmaster Link to Article iraq Keeping the goalposts in place » Posted at Crooks and Liars on Wednesday, [...]
If the SURGE is working so well... why can't we DECLARE VICTORY and just get the hell out of there?
NEITHER Congress is in session right now, so Bush and Maliki could claim an "interim declaration of success" and end this sucker... and not even have to get congressional approval.
things are always getting worse because of what the Dems do, maybe this time things are getting "better" because the the Dems seem determined to get the troops home.
MasonMcD @ 24:
You hit the nail on the head with those stats. Looking at http://icasualties.org/oif/US_chart.aspx (hope the link works) July is usually seen as a low month. This July may actually represent that things are getting worse.
Another big fat Repugnican LIE.
1) Last month was the worst July ever: 80 US dead, 89 coalition dead
(compared to 48, 54, 54, 43 US dead for July 2003-2006 respectively).
Furthermore, the final July '07 death count may not be complete, yet.
2) April/May/June '07 was the worst quarter ever for US and coalition
soldiers in Iraq, and the first time US dead numbered over 100 for
three consecutive months -- or even 2 consecutive months.
3) There appears to be a clear "seasonal variation" in coalition fatalities
with a noticable dip in the third quarter of every year. Maybe it's the
weather, or maybe it's a statistcal fluke -- but only a statistical maniac
(or a pathological liar) would declare a "downward trend" based on one
very bad month following on the heels of three disasterous months.
...brings back old memories of "Light At The End Of The Tunnel"
LK
If you look it up, I am sure you will find that July is a
bit slow every year....for casualties.....130 degrees....
not as much warfare.....
I looked.......
Salmon Dave
It just shows that the evildoers, took July off in preparation for the Iraqi Guv's month long vacation in August. ANd on cue, Aug 1, say a massive car bomb.
Fucking DUH!
The surge appears to be working only because the Iraqis are leaving. 2 million have left since the war started. Close to 1 million have been killed and 50,000 are leaving each month. There just isn't as many to kill as there has been before.
Sectarian violance has gone down only because the country has now become more segregated. Ethnic cleansing on both sides and within the police force has taken it's toll.
The surge is working not for reasons Bush would boast about. It's working because we've destroyed the fucking country. After 4 years of continuous mayhem, lack of security and services who the hell wants to stick around. Even alot of troops don't want to go back.
This is basically what Michael Ware from CNN is saying. He's on the scene and appears to be one of the few calling it like it is.
2004 January thru July coalition hostile fire fatalities = 374
2005 January thru July coalition hostile fire fatalities = 381
2006 January thru July coalition hostile fire fatalities = 355
2007 January thru July coalition hostile fire fatalities = 631
...up 78% year-to-date -- "wur makin' good progress"
LK
Ruthless People @ 13:
Looks like bad photoshop work. The words are not on the hull but over the hull.
That's my nickle...
leon kowalski @ 29:
Yea, and back in Afghanistan, where we never really finished the job the death toll seems to be increasing. We don't have a handle on Iraq and things are getting worse in Afghanistan. And Al Qaida has numerous camps set up along the Afgan-Pakistan border. We're making progress all right.
I read a piece somewhere (no citation) in the last day or so, written by an activist and ex army nurse. He said the death tally was being manipulated...the only deaths being counted were those within the borders of Iraq and not those who were taken to other military hospitals and died.
His estimate was 15,000 or more have really died as a result fatal wounds received in the occupation. Any truth to this?
Mr Pelicano @ 20:
You beat me to it.
July is a very hot month in Iraq, and the 'insurgents' tend to stay home. US casualties usually drop in July of every year but if you compare 80 for this July with 43 in July 06 and 54 in July 05, then the news unfortunately is not really that good.
What the figures really show is that the 'insurgents' are more willing than ever to brave the heat in order to kill Coalition troops.
According to Juan Cole yesterday, July 2007 was the deadliest July for the troops since the was began.
Hey Fellas, lets just take a breath and remember the numbers we're talking about are peoples sons, daughters, moms and dads. This number is bought in blood and tragedy. Just pause for a moment before you write about our dead, and remember that Republican or Democrat, we're all American and those are our friends over there.
I hate sports analogies; they're just sticky wickets.
Chip @ 35:
ej doyle @ 36:
Not quite, but your are onto a valid point. Military personnel die all over the world, regardless of whether we are at war. Consider this - during Clinton's 8 years in office, over 4,000 military personnel died while active. They were taken by disease, heart attacks, suicides, accidents, surgery complications, and other causes that don't batter and eyelash. This figure was used in the June Harper's Index and is also used by wingnuts to spin the Iraqi death toll:
http://mpinkeyes.wordpress.com/2007/02/20/military-casualties-during-the...
I wouldn't be surprised if over 10,000 military personnel have died during the Bush years. I strongly feel that there are Iraqi vets who have died while on US soil who are not being counted. But surely we would have a lot of outrage if families of war dead were making the claim that those who were killed as the result of action in Iraq were being left of the list of 3600+
While the newest numbers reveal that in Iraq the death toll for July was lower than many previous months, I am cautious to take it as a sign that the war has turned a corner and is on the path to success. It is wonderful that fewer of our troops died. However, troop casualties are not the only costs of this war.
We are still spending millions upon millions of dollars to be there, and the war is still demanding massive amounts of political and media attention. In fact, it seems that the war in Iraq is diverting funding and political attention from other issues in the foreign policy arena which deserve America’s attention. For example, the US could and should strengthen its involvement and support for the fight against global poverty; a fight which Britain’s new Prime Minister recently mentioned as an urgent and important issue facing our world today.
Login or Register to post comments.