Casualties Continue Declining
Although November was a bad month, with a couple of tragic accidents, the long-term trend of casualties in Iraq has been downward. Furthermore, since capturing Saddam, casualties are down 60%.
I'm sure glad the press is there to let us know these things. Aren't you?
It's not just politics.
I'm not even sure most journalists know how much 60% is.
That's why I prefer blogs.
I'm sure glad the press is there to let us know these things. Aren't you?
Actually, last night I saw a thing on one of the cable news channels (either MSNBC or Fox News).
Let me see if I can explain this clearly. The reporter said that the average number of attacks per day were down sharply in December vs. November.
But the average number of attacks per day had recently gone up in January vs. December.
Still, it was clear from the report that average number of attacks per day in January were down sharply vs. November.
The report says attacks are down 60%, not casualties.
The actual quote is "I also can tell you that we're on a glide-path toward success as attacks against Task Force All American forces have decreased almost 60 percent over the past month." source: http://www.dod.mil/transcripts/2004/tr20040106-1103.html
This is just attacks against this "Task Force All American," which is just "The 82d Airborne Division and attached units," source: http://nyjtimes.com/Stories/2003/12StableIraq.htm
So, what's the actual situation? I don't know, but it seems to me that statements are being made that distort the actual message sent by the army. And how about the attack today that injured 35 Americans with 6 mortor shells? Damn that Iraq sure sounds like a safe place to me.
Actually, Jerry, casualties have significantly dropped as well.