The surge is absolutely working

tomywishbone

Golden Member
Oct 24, 2006
1,401
0
0
I predicted that after the surge, no less than 73 people would be killed daily in Iraq. I was wrong... proof of my wrongness follows.

Bombers strike at Iraqi army, civilians By LAUREN FRAYER, Associated Press Writer, 2 hours, 12 minutes ago.


BAGHDAD - Bombers struck an Iraqi army post northeast of Baghdad and civilian targets in the city as violence across Iraq killed at least 72 people Thursday, including the bullet-riddled bodies of 27 men dumped in the capital ? apparent victims of sectarian death squads. Still, the top American military spokesman insisted the U.S. command felt "very comfortable" that it is making "steady progress" in restoring order in Baghdad.

"We are seeing those initial signs of progress being made," Maj. Gen. William C. Caldwell told Associated Press Radio.

The violence came as the Democratic-controlled U.S. Senate adopted House-passed legislation calling for U.S. troops to begin leaving Iraq by Oct. 1. President Bush pledged to veto the measure, and neither body passed the measure with enough votes to override a veto.

Iraqi government spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh said Oct. 1 was too soon for a withdrawal to start and criticized the Senate vote, saying it "sends wrong signals" to armed militants.

The deadliest attack occurred about 9 a.m. when a suicide car bomber killed 10 Iraqi soldiers at a checkpoint in Khalis, a longtime flashpoint city about 50 miles northeast of Baghdad. Ten other soldiers and five civilians were wounded, police said.

The city is in Diyala province, which has seen some of Iraq's worst violence recently. Mostly Sunni Arab insurgents are thought to have fled to the area to escape the security crackdown in Baghdad that U.S. and Iraqi troops launched Feb. 14.

In the capital, a car bomb exploded near Baghdad University, killing eight civilians and wounding 19, including some students, police said.

Associated Press Television News footage showed an elderly woman screaming, "Oh, my son," as she sobbed beside twisted debris.

Ahmed Jassim, who works in a nearby hotel, said he rushed outside after hearing the explosion and helped carry the wounded to ambulances.

"The insurgents were surely targeting civilians because there was no military presence in the area," he said. "I saw small pieces of flesh and a small blood pool."

Four other civilians were killed and nine wounded when a roadside bomb exploded near a market in central Baghdad, police said. The blast missed its intended target ? a passing police patrol.

In the city's sprawling Shiite Muslim neighborhood of Sadr City, U.S. troops killed three militants during a gunbattle, the military said. Later in the day, a funeral procession was held in the district for an Iraqi who residents said was killed in the fighting.

Two suicide bombers attacked an office of the Kurdistan Democratic Party of Massoud Barzani, leader of the autonomous Kurdish region in northern Iraq.

The blasts killed three security guards and wounded five, police said. Casualties could have been worse if guards had not opened fire on the two attackers, forcing them to detonate their explosives at least 50 yards from the office, police said.

The bombing in Zumar, a town 45 miles west of Mosul, capital of Ninevah province, was the second suicide attack this week aimed at the party in that area.

In other violence, four insurgents were killed as the U.S. targeted suspected al-Qaida in Iraq militants near Taji, a U.S. air base 12 miles north of Baghdad, the U.S. command said.

It said two women and two children were also believed to have been killed during the fighting. "Unfortunately al-Qaida in Iraq continues to use women and children in their illegal activities," U.S. spokesman Christopher Garver said.

Two civilians were killed and 12 wounded when mortar shells exploded in the southern Baghdad district of Dora, police said. One civilian died and four were wounded when a car bomb exploded in the Baiyaa district of southwestern Baghdad.

At least 30 tortured bodies were found, including 27 who had been shot to death and left in different parts of Baghdad and three decapitated bodies found south of the capital.

In Tikrit, police said the wife and daughter of a Saddam Hussein cousin were found slain at their home. The wife of Hashim Hassan al-Majid had been shot and the daughter strangled, police Capt. Samir Mohammed said. Their names were not released.

Al-Majid's brother is Ali Hassan "Chemical Ali" al-Majid, one of the most notorious figures of Saddam's regime, who is on trial for his alleged role in gassing Kurds and other abuses during a crackdown on Kurds in the 1980s.

Hashim Hassan Al-Majid, who held various posts in Saddam's government, was arrested after the regime fell, Tajik residents said.

 

dmcowen674

No Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
54,889
47
91
www.alienbabeltech.com
Originally posted by: tomywishbone
I predicted that after the surge, no less than 73 people would be killed daily in Iraq. I was wrong... proof of my wrongness follows.

Bombers strike at Iraqi army, civilians

BAGHDAD - Bombers struck an Iraqi army post northeast of Baghdad and civilian targets in the city as violence across Iraq killed at least 72 people Thursday, including the bullet-riddled bodies of 27 men dumped in the capital ? apparent victims of sectarian death squads. Still, the top American military spokesman insisted the U.S. command felt "very comfortable" that it is making "steady progress" in restoring order in Baghdad.

Remedial math maybe?
 
Jun 27, 2005
19,216
1
61
Technically we're still "surging"

IIRC we have about 60% of the surge in place now. I'm not defending anything here... I'm just saying. We won't have everyone in place until this summer.

THEN we can officially call it a failure.
 

ShinGouki

Member
Jan 23, 2003
151
0
0
"I predicted that after the surge, no less than 73 people would be killed daily in Iraq. I was wrong... proof of my wrongness follows."

Is this some sick sort of sarcasm meant to make you look smart, using people's deaths to prove how good you are at predicting things is real good of you... The Iraq war is certainly looking like a big screw up yes but do you really have to use events like these as a means of proving how clever you think you are?

If I've somehow misintepreted the point of this thread then apologies in advance but otherwise you could do with less of this crap. Being correct about catasrophic loss of life is hardly something to be proud of unless you have the intent and ability to do something about it.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: ShinGouki
"I predicted that after the surge, no less than 73 people would be killed daily in Iraq. I was wrong... proof of my wrongness follows."

Is this some sick sort of sarcasm meant to make you look smart, using people's deaths to prove how good you are at predicting things is real good of you... The Iraq war is certainly looking like a big screw up yes but do you really have to use events like these as a means of proving how clever you think you are?

If I've somehow misintepreted the point of this thread then apologies in advance but otherwise you could do with less of this crap. Being correct about catasrophic loss of life is hardly something to be proud of unless you have the intent and ability to do something about it.
How else except with the quantifiable loss of lives can this surge most effectively be deemed a success or failure?
 

ShinGouki

Member
Jan 23, 2003
151
0
0
"How else except with the quantifiable loss of lives can this surge most effectively be deemed a success or failure?"

Skorb I think you've missed my point, I'm not saying the surge is a success or failure. I'm saying the OP title and what was quoted are innapropriate as they seem to have been posted purely with the intent of saying "look at me I was right aren't I clever". I'm in no way defending the surge.
 

StageLeft

No Lifer
Sep 29, 2000
70,150
5
0
Originally posted by: ShinGouki
"How else except with the quantifiable loss of lives can this surge most effectively be deemed a success or failure?"

Skorb I think you've missed my point, I'm not saying the surge is a success or failure. I'm saying the OP title and what was quoted are innapropriate as they seem to have been posted purely with the intent of saying "look at me I was right aren't I clever". I'm in no way defending the surge.
I know, but how can the surge be deemed a success or failure without quantifiable metrics? In his case he happened to use the loss of life as his key metric!

 

ShinGouki

Member
Jan 23, 2003
151
0
0
Well in answer to your question, I'd say an decrease in violence / number of attacks and an increase in overall stability would be good metrics for deeming it a success... Obviously an increase in violence / number attacks and a general decrease in stability would suggest it is failing :).

Again I wasnt saying anything about whether the OP was wrong or right, merely that there are more appropriate ways of saying so without being an ass.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Originally posted by: ShinGouki
"I predicted that after the surge, no less than 73 people would be killed daily in Iraq. I was wrong... proof of my wrongness follows."

Is this some sick sort of sarcasm meant to make you look smart, using people's deaths to prove how good you are at predicting things is real good of you... The Iraq war is certainly looking like a big screw up yes but do you really have to use events like these as a means of proving how clever you think you are?

If I've somehow misintepreted the point of this thread then apologies in advance but otherwise you could do with less of this crap. Being correct about catasrophic loss of life is hardly something to be proud of unless you have the intent and ability to do something about it.
How else except with the quantifiable loss of lives can this surge most effectively be deemed a success or failure?
So based on the 20% reduction in deaths nation wide during the first two months of the surge we can call it a success?

Tommy likes to point to every attack and death as proof that the surge is a failure, but seems to forget that prior to the surge an average of 50 people a day were dying in and around Baghdad. We cannot look at individual days and attacks and instead must look at the overall picture in order to make an informed decision about progress, or lack of progress, in Iraq.

Also looking at the number of civilian Iraqi casualties and using it as a sign that the surge is failing and that we must leave strikes me as intellectually dishonest. By looking at the death toll and saying ?look Iraqis are dying, we must leave!? you are implying that the deaths of Iraqi civilians are a bad thing. However, you are ignoring the fact that us leaving will result in a rise in the number of civilian deaths. If we withdraw will Tommy be making threads saying ?The number of deaths in Iraq is double what it was before we left. We should have stayed!?? I highly doubt it.

Now if you want to make the argument that we should leave because the number of American military casualties is to high then go ahead and do so. At least then you are being consistent since clearly us leaving will result in less American deaths, at least in the short term.
 

tomywishbone

Golden Member
Oct 24, 2006
1,401
0
0
Originally posted by: ShinGouki
"I predicted that after the surge, no less than 73 people would be killed daily in Iraq. I was wrong... proof of my wrongness follows."

Is this some sick sort of sarcasm meant to make you look smart, using people's deaths to prove how good you are at predicting things is real good of you... The Iraq war is certainly looking like a big screw up yes but do you really have to use events like these as a means of proving how clever you think you are?

If I've somehow misintepreted the point of this thread then apologies in advance but otherwise you could do with less of this crap. Being correct about catasrophic loss of life is hardly something to be proud of unless you have the intent and ability to do something about it.


Please check your sarcasm meter. I made no prediction. I make no predictions. I never look smart. It was just a way of saying, Iraq is lost and we are fools to keep dying & killing & lying & spending &...
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
I'm begining to think the Neocon strategy is to piss the American people off so badly that they get frustrated enough to nuke Iran.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Where are the 200,000 troops a proper surge needs to succeed? When the surge plan was first laid out
by GWB&co., our increase of 20,500 troops was going to much more than matched by the Iraqi police and army.

But with absolutely NO PUBLIC FANFARE, the US military has quietly realized that the Iraqi police and army are worse than useless---because as soon as we deploy them they join the insurgency.

SOMEHOW THAT FACT HAS FLOWN UNDER NEATLY EVERYONE'S RADAR----so I ask again, where are the 200,000 troops that are needed to implement a surge plan that has a chance of working?

And if the US military can't come up with that number, only the international community can. And the international community WILL NOT FOLLOW THE LITTLE BOY WHO CRIED WOLF. Another fact that flies under nearly everyone's radar.

Therefore sending GWB&co. to the Hague may be the only acceptable down payment for that required international support. And then Iraqi options and optimism become possible.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
41,362
10,481
136
Originally posted by: ShinGouki
"How else except with the quantifiable loss of lives can this surge most effectively be deemed a success or failure?"

Skorb I think you've missed my point, I'm not saying the surge is a success or failure. I'm saying the OP title and what was quoted are innapropriate as they seem to have been posted purely with the intent of saying "look at me I was right aren't I clever". I'm in no way defending the surge.

I thoroughly agree with ShinGouki here.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
So based on the 20% reduction in deaths nation wide during the first two months of the surge we can call it a success?

Tommy likes to point to every attack and death as proof that the surge is a failure, but seems to forget that prior to the surge an average of 50 people a day were dying in and around Baghdad. We cannot look at individual days and attacks and instead must look at the overall picture in order to make an informed decision about progress, or lack of progress, in Iraq.

Also looking at the number of civilian Iraqi casualties and using it as a sign that the surge is failing and that we must leave strikes me as intellectually dishonest. By looking at the death toll and saying ?look Iraqis are dying, we must leave!? you are implying that the deaths of Iraqi civilians are a bad thing. However, you are ignoring the fact that us leaving will result in a rise in the number of civilian deaths. If we withdraw will Tommy be making threads saying ?The number of deaths in Iraq is double what it was before we left. We should have stayed!?? I highly doubt it.

Now if you want to make the argument that we should leave because the number of American military casualties is to high then go ahead and do so. At least then you are being consistent since clearly us leaving will result in less American deaths, at least in the short term.

Of course what you fail to realize is that many of us never wanted to be in Iraq in the first place. We've been consistent about that fact since before the war began, what makes you think the troop surge in Baghdad is going to convince us otherwise? Because it's not.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,136
1
0
I'd also like to take exception to that 20% reduction in civilian casualties. I would think it would be difficult to track any improvement when the Iraqi government mysteriously stopped reporting civilian death totals since January. Hmmmm, convenient isn't it?

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The United Nations is unable to determine how many Iraqi civilians have been killed so far this year because the Iraqi government won't share the information, a U.N. agency said in a Wednesday report.

An Iraqi government official denied that the information was withheld to cover up the number of civilian deaths, and the prime minister's office said the U.N. report "lacks accuracy."

[...]

The quarterly human rights report, written by the U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq, is considered the most reliable tally of civilians killed in the country, but Wednesday's report did not include the numbers for January, February and March.

CNN
 

cliftonite

Diamond Member
Jul 15, 2001
6,900
63
91
Originally posted by: DealMonkey
I'd also like to take exception to that 20% reduction in civilian casualties. I would think it would be difficult to track any improvement when the Iraqi government mysteriously stopped reporting civilian death totals since January. Hmmmm, convenient isn't it?

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- The United Nations is unable to determine how many Iraqi civilians have been killed so far this year because the Iraqi government won't share the information, a U.N. agency said in a Wednesday report.

An Iraqi government official denied that the information was withheld to cover up the number of civilian deaths, and the prime minister's office said the U.N. report "lacks accuracy."

[...]

The quarterly human rights report, written by the U.N. Assistance Mission for Iraq, is considered the most reliable tally of civilians killed in the country, but Wednesday's report did not include the numbers for January, February and March.

CNN

Your going to believe that libural rag cnn? Please post some real sources ;)
 

Gaard

Diamond Member
Feb 17, 2002
8,911
1
0
Just curious, is the surge nationwaide? I know W said "...vast majority going to Baghdad..." , but anyone have the numbers?
 

Puffnstuff

Lifer
Mar 9, 2005
16,256
4,930
136
I believe that this surge would've been successful if it had happened 18-24 months ago. As it stands now the people of Iraq no longer trust our government and are turning to the insurgency as a viable means of attaining freedom from the occupation and a step towards returning to some sort of normality in their war torn country. What they are doing is akin to what was portrayed in the movie Red Dawn. Remember that? Americans resisting their invaders with every available means. This country messed really bad and it's time to officially recognize that fact and set a new course. There are too many hands in the cookie jar right now especially with Iran and Syria conducting destabilization efforts. The people of Iraq, the victims of this botched action deserve to have their country and their lives back.