• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

with the Kraken taking a plea, the Cheese stands alone.

Baby steps, because the Republican Party is full of angry babies.

But frankly mr. cole, I’ll be happier when you get back to telling us to go fuck ourselves.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

Is it negotiation when the other party actually wants to shoot the hostage?

Fuck the extremist election deniers. What’s money for if not for keeping them out of office?

An unpunished coup is a training exercise.

A consequence of cucumbers

Republicans would impeach Biden if he bit into a whole Kit Kat rather than breaking the sections apart.

Do not shrug your shoulders and accept the normalization of untruths.

It’s a doggy dog world.

Motto for the House: Flip 5 and lose none.

Live so that if you miss a day of work people aren’t hoping you’re dead.

There is one struggling party in US right now, and it’s not the Democrats.

Let’s not be the monsters we hate.

If West Virginia and San Francisco had a love child.

The choice is between normal and crazy.

We know you aren’t a Democrat but since you seem confused let me help you.

The words do not have to be perfect.

Can we lighten up on the doomsday scenarios?

Russia bombs Ukraine’s maternity hospitals; Republicans in the House can’t sort out supporting Ukraine.

When you’re in more danger from the IDF than from Russian shelling, that’s really bad.

Fani Willis claps back at Trump chihuahua, Jim Jordan.

There are consequences to being an arrogant, sullen prick.

Mobile Menu

  • Four Directions Montana
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • 2024 Elections
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • Targeted Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Foreign Affairs / Military / Good News

Good News

by John Cole|  October 1, 20079:30 am| 28 Comments

This post is in: Military, War

FacebookTweetEmail

This is good news:

Deaths among American forces and Iraqi civilians fell dramatically last month to their lowest levels in more than a year, according to figures compiled by the U.S. military, the Iraqi government and The Associated Press.

The decline signaled a U.S. success in bringing down violence in Baghdad and surrounding regions since Washington completed its infusion of 30,000 more troops on June 15.

A total of 64 American forces died in September — the lowest monthly toll since July 2006.

The decline in Iraqi civilian deaths was even more dramatic, falling from 1,975 in August to 922 last month, a decline of 53.3 percent. The breakdown in September was 844 civilians and 78 police and Iraqi soldiers, according to Iraq’s ministries of Health, Interior and Defense.

I am not going to quibble with whether the civilian deaths are down because the ethnic cleansing is complete, or whether the violence has just been pushed to other regions, etc.

This is good news, and it is nice to see. Still entirely too many, but fewer dead soldiers is good news any way you slice it.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « We Can Sit and Talk and Not Talk For Hours and Still Have Things to Not Talk About
Next Post: The Fracture »

Reader Interactions

28Comments

  1. 1.

    Dug Jay

    October 1, 2007 at 9:39 am

    Yes, that is good news although every death is one too many.The PBS series by Ken Burns on World War II puts some perspective on the awful casualties from Iraq; total US casualties were almost 1.1 million with a little over 400,000 deaths on the battlefield and in non-theatre accidents.

  2. 2.

    The Other Steve

    October 1, 2007 at 9:55 am

    If the surge has worked, this decline should continue over the next friedman unit. If so, then I think it’s clear we can safely withdrawl.

  3. 3.

    The Other Steve

    October 1, 2007 at 9:56 am

    Yes, that is good news although every death is one too many.The PBS series by Ken Burns on World War II puts some perspective on the awful casualties from Iraq; total US casualties were almost 1.1 million with a little over 400,000 deaths on the battlefield and in non-theatre accidents.

    American lives are cheap, and a small price to pay for attaining what we have attained.

    Er, uhh… The Ken Burns documentary put something into perspective, but that wasn’t it.

  4. 4.

    Jake

    October 1, 2007 at 10:02 am

    Great, can we GtFo now? Please?

  5. 5.

    The Stranger

    October 1, 2007 at 10:10 am

    I am not going to quibble with whether the civilian deaths are down because the ethnic cleansing is complete, or whether the violence has just been pushed to other regions, etc.

    Oh, you’d have heard about it alright. The MSM would have taken any figures of civilain deaths and exagerated them by a factor of at least five.

  6. 6.

    Wilfred

    October 1, 2007 at 10:15 am

    A good deal of the reduction in sectarian violence and reduced number of attacks on US troops has to do with Ramadan (which started 13 September) and its physical and psychological proscriptions. Less killing is always something to be grateful for but attributing cause and effect should wait until Ramadan is over.

  7. 7.

    Zifnab

    October 1, 2007 at 10:17 am

    Isn’t there a chart that shows troop casualty trends in Iraq? Oh yeah. http://icasualties.org/oif_a/CasualtyTrends.htm

    Seriously, this isn’t particularly good or bad news, it’s just another data point on the trend table. Read the graph from a month-to-month perspective, and we’ve seen epic success followed by catastrophic failure. But, ultimately, the casualty figures aren’t going down over the long term.

    Iraqi casualties, much like Iraqi budget reports, aren’t any more encouraging because they’re slightly less than expected. 64 people died this September who shouldn’t have died, wouldn’t have died, if we hadn’t invaded in ’03. 64 more soldiers who got killed because Democrats were too chickenshit to hold the line against Bush’s $90 billion political ransom note in May and end this war.

    I guess it’s better than having 65 people dead in September, but its a cold comfort.

  8. 8.

    scarshapedstar

    October 1, 2007 at 10:23 am

    Alright, now that we’ve declared victory, can we get out?

  9. 9.

    mightygodking

    October 1, 2007 at 10:25 am

    The PBS series by Ken Burns on World War II puts some perspective on the awful casualties from Iraq; total US casualties were almost 1.1 million with a little over 400,000 deaths on the battlefield and in non-theatre accidents.

    My god, it’s almost like in one case the United States was at war against the deadliest military machine in Europe, and in the other case they’re fighting a bunch of civilians with Kalashnikovs.

  10. 10.

    Pb

    October 1, 2007 at 10:31 am

    Heh, here’s a headline…

    Reuters: Iraqis say Basra quieter after British troop pullout

    Hey, works for me. Way better than this one:

    Reuters: 11 handcuffed and blindfolded bodies found in Mosul

  11. 11.

    The Other Steve

    October 1, 2007 at 10:44 am

    My god, it’s almost like in one case the United States was at war against the deadliest military machine in Europe, and in the other case they’re fighting a bunch of civilians with Kalashnikovs.

    Iraq is just like Germany!

    Only now with a great meaty taste.

  12. 12.

    whippoorwill

    October 1, 2007 at 11:25 am

    This is good news, and it is nice to see

    unequivocally

  13. 13.

    RSA

    October 1, 2007 at 11:43 am

    Still entirely too many, but fewer dead soldiers is good news any way you slice it.

    Yes. The difficulty, I think, is that if someone on the left were to say, “If we bring everyone home, that will bring down the number of dead American soldiers in Iraq to zero,” someone on the right will respond, “But then Iraq will descend into chaos.” This hypothetical exchange tells me that raw numbers aren’t really suggestive of much, as Zifnab writes. Has Iraq started on a path to stability this past month? Who knows, without some measure of the political situation?

  14. 14.

    TenguPhule

    October 1, 2007 at 11:44 am

    The decline signaled a U.S. success in bringing down violence in Baghdad and surrounding regions since Washington completed its infusion of 30,000 more troops on June 15.

    John, I gotta call Bullshit on this one.

    The other side just took a brief break due to the heat, we’re heading into the real bloody months now.

  15. 15.

    Punchy

    October 1, 2007 at 11:45 am

    Anyone wanna bet this is not the Official Report 2-3 days from today?

    Anyone wanna bet that the Offical Report will say…pretty much the opposite?

    Soverign nation, bitches.

  16. 16.

    Bubblegum Tate

    October 1, 2007 at 12:17 pm

    someone on the right will respond, “But then Iraq will descend into chaos.”

    And then you say, “So then what’s been going on in Iraq this whole time?” And the winger will say, “Definitely not chaos. Freedom. Why do you hate America?”

    And your eyes will damn near roll out of your head.

  17. 17.

    The Stranger

    October 1, 2007 at 12:18 pm

    A good deal of the reduction in sectarian violence and reduced number of attacks on US troops has to do with Ramadan (which started 13 September) and its physical and psychological proscriptions. Less killing is always something to be grateful for but attributing cause and effect should wait until Ramadan is over.

    Ummm….Skippy:

    This year, for the first time since our troops have been in Iraq, the Ramadan Spike has failed to materialize. Few events in Iraq were as predictable as the yearly rise in causalities it signified. In 2004, 2005, and 2006, shortly before and during the autumn months in which Ramadan has recently occurred, violence against US forces escalated significantly,

  18. 18.

    Wilfred

    October 1, 2007 at 12:45 pm

    Umm…Asshole:

    I was mainly referring to the decrease in sectarian, Iraqi on Iraqi, Muslim on Muslim violence, the point of the surge. The decrease in US casualties has also to do with the cooperation of tribal sheiks in Anbar, which has lowered the number of attacks.

    Further, as Ramadan is lunar, this is also the hottest one since the occupation began (in 2004, Ramadan started on October 16), the ramifications of which are obvious.

    As for the yearly rise in ‘causalities‘ I advise again to not draw cause and effect relationships with the surge.

  19. 19.

    Pb

    October 1, 2007 at 12:47 pm

    The Stranger,

    What are you talking about, what spike? See here for the numbers (scroll down to “U.S. Deaths By Month/Year:”).

  20. 20.

    whippoorwill

    October 1, 2007 at 1:45 pm

    This year, for the first time since our troops have been in Iraq, the Ramadan Spike has failed to materialize

    stranger,

    If US casualties continue to go down for another 6 months there might be something positive going on that is sustainable. 64 deaths of American GI’s is still too many to draw conclusions after one month. And if you believe in the Iraqi’s statistics on civilian deaths, then I got a bridge to sell you, skippy.

    Meanwhile, as John said in this thread, fewer deaths are a good thing regardless of what it means or doesn’t mean for the situation in Iraq.

  21. 21.

    Wilfred

    October 1, 2007 at 1:56 pm

    . And if you believe in the Iraqi’s statistics on civilian deaths, then I got a bridge to sell you, skippy.

    Cue General Petraeus:

    Petraeus’s spokesman, Colonel Steven A. Boylan, acknowledges the “host nation” data used by MNF-I statisticians is frequently “unverified” and “possibly inflated.” In an email, he raised a particular red flag about the “host nation” data for December 2006, the base line for Petraeus’s claim of an “over 45-percent drop” in Iraqi civilian deaths. He said that the December 2006 data contained “a large number of unverified host nation reports of dead civilians

  22. 22.

    The Stranger

    October 1, 2007 at 2:09 pm

    You said this:
    reduced number of attacks on US troops has to do with Ramadan (which started 13 September)

    Before saying this:
    I was mainly referring to the decrease in sectarian, Iraqi on Iraqi, Muslim on Muslim violence,

    A real John Kerry moment, ain’t it?

  23. 23.

    Bruce Moomaw

    October 1, 2007 at 2:17 pm

    Yup. Let’s keep in mind that the bizarre clash between Petraeus’ graph showing a supposed dramatic drop in civilian deaths after the Surge started and the Pentagon’s own figures — which actually showed a pre-Surge death count bigger than Petraeus’ pre-Surge figures for civilian DEAD AND WOUNDED COMBINED — turned out to be due to the fact that he himself, for his testimony, used the Iraqi government’s casualty figures, which are about as accurate as Baghdad Bob’s press conferences.

    As for the drop in US casualties: I’d like to know how it’s distributed — and thus how much it’s due to the fact that the ethnic cleansing of Baghdad is mostly complete. I imagine we’ll find out within the next few months, however (assuming that an equally half-baked Cheney-designed Iran war hasn’t drowned out the figures by then).

  24. 24.

    Wilfred

    October 1, 2007 at 2:26 pm

    Well, Stranger, you know what they say: أسمع جعجعة ولا أرى طحناً”

  25. 25.

    Bruce Moomaw

    October 1, 2007 at 2:46 pm

    I believe I’ve just won the Nobel Prize for Typos, although the point I intended to make remains untouched and in fact further bolstered. It was PETRAEUS’ pre-Surge civilian death count that was higher than the Pentagon’s count of dead and wounded combined — because, as the Pentagon then explained, Petraeus had been using the Iraq government’s data rather than the US military’s own. He also used the Iraq government’s data, rather than the Pentagon’s, to declare that supposed sudden dramatic post-Surge drop in casualities. (See the Sept. 24 Washington Post.) And now, lo and behold, we learn that the Pentagon has now suddenly also switched to using the Iraq government’s civilian-death data as well. Gotta keep making the General look good, regardless of the fact that the current Iraqi government is about as reliable an information source as Professor Marvel.

  26. 26.

    Downtown Lad

    October 1, 2007 at 8:08 pm

    Actually, Patreus is smart. Gets the press release out. Now they’ll be a flood of deaths – that they’ll just pile into September. They did this for July too, when they piled about 8 deaths into July once the press release was out.

    The death toll is already at 66. So it’s no longer the lowest since July of 2006. It’s now the lowest since August of 2006.

    They also held off on announcing deaths until after he spoke to Congress.

  27. 27.

    Bombadil

    October 2, 2007 at 3:13 pm

    The Stranger has to be Darrell.

Comments are closed.

Trackbacks

  1. Balloon Juice says:
    October 8, 2007 at 9:14 am

    […] So there you have it. Because the media will not immediate declare Iraq a success after a one month decline in casualties, the media is biased. Because they will not make sweeping generalizations about everything in Iraq based on a one month decline in troop fatalaties, the media hates America. The notion of bias seems to come from the perception that “if more soldiers had been killed, it would have been reported more heavily,” compared to the difficulty in reporting soldiers who didn’t die (if casualties spike upwards, we have offcial numbers, and it is an obvious surge in deaths. If they go down, less dead soldiers is obviously a good thing, but it isn’t proof of a trend). Even then, the numbers were reported, as I commented about it. Here is the AP report I linked to: […]

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • lowtechcyclist on I Am All For This! (Apr 17, 2024 @ 4:46pm)
  • Mo MacArbie on Cold Grey Pre-Dawn Open Thread: Fading Neom Dreams (Apr 17, 2024 @ 4:46pm)
  • 🐾BillinGlendaleCA on On The Road – BillinGlendaleCA – The Milky Way Reimagined. (Apr 17, 2024 @ 4:45pm)
  • rikyrah on I Am All For This! (Apr 17, 2024 @ 4:44pm)
  • Jay on I Am All For This! (Apr 17, 2024 @ 4:43pm)

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Talk of Meetups – Meetup Planning
Proposed BJ meetups list from frosty

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8
Virginia House Races
Four Directions – Montana
Worker Power AZ
Four Directions – Arizona
Four Directions – Nevada

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
Positive Climate News
War in Ukraine
Cole’s “Stories from the Road”
Classified Documents Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Fix Nyms with Apostrophes

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Political Action 2024

Postcard Writing Information

Balloon Juice for Four Directions AZ

Donate

Balloon Juice for Four Directions NV

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2024 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!