Baghdad killings down nearly 50% since crackdown begins.

[samclem]

Just in case you missed it (buried deep inside your local paper), the number of victims of sectarian death squads in Baghdad is down--sharply-- in the first three weeks of the security crackdown.

http://www.canada.com/montrealgazett...a6e1be&k=28859

Some good news. Is there anyone here who is NOT happy that sectarian violence is reduced and there are fewer dead Iraqis?

[73ss454]

From what I make of this conflict they'll just move the killing to another town for a while. It's hard to fight with people that want to die. There seems to be no end to people that want to blow themselves up.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Or is it simply a change in the way the stats are gathered to produce the desired result?

Theres been a little too much of that to make me believe anything without a lot of details.

They sort of lost me with the whole "if someone shoots at us and misses, or blows something up and nobody is hurt, it doesnt count" dealio. :P

[JohnEyles]

It certainly is good news if it's true, and it's certainly plausible. People I respect,
(like NY Times' Baghdad chief John Burns) say that there is no question that
American troops are a calming influence in whatever area they concentrate in
Iraq these day. And that because of the way they are being deployed, the
small-seeming surge will actually cause a more-than-doubling of the number of
Americans actually trying to keep the peace on the streets of Baghdad.

That being said, this:

Or is it simply a change in the way the stats are gathered to produce the desired result?

is also a very plausible explanation, it's very sad to say.

[bssc]

Here is an interesting article by Lt. Col. Craig T. Trebilcock called the Modern Seven Pillar of Iraq (with a nod to Lawrence). It is from the February 2007 Army magazine. The URL is http://www.ausa.org/pdfdocs/ArmyMag/...Trebilcock.pdf
He argues that the best way to start the political process in Iraq is to draw down the military.

[F-One]

Maybe Baghdad is down but country hasn't changed - per Juan Cole according to an Iraqi government leaked report - Iraqi deaths in January 1990 in 31 days (64/day) for February 1646 in 27 days - reported a day earlier than month end (61/day). Of course it is 3 less per day but certainly not huge.

[lets-retire]

Originally Posted by F-One

Maybe Baghdad is down but country hasn't changed - per Juan Cole according to an Iraqi government leaked report - Iraqi deaths in January 1990 in 31 days (64/day) for February 1646 in 27 days - reported a day earlier than month end (61/day). Of course it is 3 less per day but certainly not huge.

I guess that goes against those who say Iraq was a lot safer under Saddam.

[Zathras]

I have seen the government redefine words far too often to feel confident in this report.
If it is true that fewer Iraqi's are dying that is great news.
However, if the definition of sectarian violence has changed, we need to know what the old official definition and the new one are before we can judge.

[FinanceDude]

I have HOPE that the Iraqis are getting the message that "free lunch time" is over. Regardless of the many discussions we have had on here whether we were right to invade or not, in the end it's THEIR COUNTRY.

One of our Congressmen here, Paul Ryan, just got back from Iraq. He said he made it VERY CLEAR to the Iraqis that this is their "last chance" to get their "you know what"'s together, or else we will be out of there. He feels that by the end of summer, if the status quo doesn't change, Congress will begin a pretty significant removal of troops, and Bush won't be able to do anything about it.

Keep in mind this guy is a conservative Republican...........

[MasterBlaster]

Some groups of people like to dine on exotic cuisine.

Other groups like to listen to music or to write poetry.

In Iraq and other arab countries they like to kill people. It's kind of a hobby they have.

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Originally Posted by lets-retire

I guess that goes against those who say Iraq was a lot safer under Saddam.

I dont know if I'd say it was safer, but I would imagine that saddam wasnt killing the average joe, just the people who actively pissed him off. He also was pretty intolerant of the sectarian violence and terrorist activity within his country, to assure his regime wasnt threatened.

I think if someone is trying to establish that things are "better" since we invaded, they're going to have to try pretty hard. That doesnt seem to be the case.

[FinanceDude]

Originally Posted by MasterBlaster

Some groups of people like to dine on exotic cuisine.

Other groups like to listen to music or to write poetry.

In Iraq and other arab countries they like to kill people. It's kind of a hobby they have.

Don't hear much about it out of Kuwait, United Arab Emirates, Dubai, or even Jordan for that matter.............

[dex]

Originally Posted by MasterBlaster

In Iraq and other arab countries they like to kill people. It's kind of a hobby they have.

That could be said about the USA also - The only difference is the method used to kill people - guns & bombs vs in the USA:
Drugs
Alcohol
Tobacco
Overeating
Automobiles
Guns (I'm an owner)
The items above are not discussed because they are not as dramatic as guns and bombs.
If all the people in the USA who died as a result of illeagl drugs were killed with guns and bombs it might get some attention

[JohnEyles]

Originally Posted by dex

If all the people in the USA who died as a result of illeagl drugs were killed with guns ...

Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that virtually all the people who are
killed in this country as a result of illegal drugs ARE killed wtih guns. In other
words, they're killed BECAUSE the drugs are illegal.

[lets-retire]

Originally Posted by RustyShackleford

Uh, correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that virtually all the people who are
killed in this country as a result of illegal drugs ARE killed wtih guns. In other
words, they're killed BECAUSE the drugs are illegal.

I'll correct you. While there is a lot of violence associated with illegal drug use, most people die because of drug overdose not being shot.

[samclem]

Originally Posted by Cute Fuzzy Bunny

Or is it simply a change in the way the stats are gathered to produce the desired result?

I guess it might be, but according to the article (by the AP) the figures were compiled by the AP based on "police reports." It doesn't look like the US supplied the numbers.

The ranking US folks have cautioned that we shouldn't make too much of this report, as it is early and things can certainly change quickly. Still, if killings had gone up, it would be the top story on every channel and with subheadings "More US Troops Only Provide More Targets for Determined Insurgents." Right.