If we're winning in Iraq, why is the U.S. death toll higher than ever this year ?

Question

Much was made about the decrease in violence just weeks ago.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071106/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq

Also, will things go back to the way they were pre-surge when we start bring some troops home in the spring ?

Answer 1

Iraq is turning out to be like Vietnam all over again. We're already at the point where people like Gen .Patraeus are suggesting a withdrawal of troops, and I don't suppose it'll be too much longer. This is an un-winnable war that American leaders just can't understand. No matter what manpower, supplies, firepower we have, it is up to the Iraqi people to decide to take up democracy or not.

To say that we're in Iraq to prevent terrorist attacks is laughable. Our per capita homeland defense spending amounts to around maybe 20 dollars per US Citizen. Thousands upon thousands of our young men and women are over there fighting a war against an insurgency that is ever-growing, yet over here, almost nothing is being done to prevent another 9/11.

To say that we're winning because we've killed more of them than they have killed us is also ridiculous. This is not a set-piece battle like WWI. We have no fronts here. In the Vietnam War, we killed a helluva lot more Vietnamese than NVA + Vietcong killed US troops, yet did we win in Vietnam? uhh no.

And also, how do YOU measure military success? What are the terms of victory? How can we know if we're winning if we don't even ******* know what constitutes victory?!
If victory means a democratic Iraq, then we are losing. If a foreign nation invades YOUR country and ruins your country, are you going to like them? Probably not.

Answer 2

The administration's propaganda machine is working overtime to paint a positive picture of the situation in Iraq. They have to put a positive spin on it, or the Republicans don't stand a chance in the upcoming election.

In reality, where I live, it's a no-win situation. Islam will never accept a government in the Middle East imposed by the US neo-cons even if we stay there, bleeding, for a thousand years.

Those people in Iraq who oppose the US are just laying low now because they see that public opinion is against the war and suspect that a less foolish leadership will be coming in a year.

If it appears that a conservative Republican war monger like Bush will win the election, you will witness an explosion of violent bloodshed in Iraq the likes of which have not been seen since the Tet offensive, in Vietnam.

Answer 3

In the last two to three months, the US casualty toll has subsided, somewhat. Tell that to a wife or mother who's husband or son has been one of those reduced casualty's. In any case, this could be a sign that our efforts have taken there toll in weakening the insurgents and their losing cause in Iraq.

Many Sunni warlords have switched sides, and are now cooperating with the US troops. In the past, they were sympathetic to the Iran supported insurgents, but now realize they were simply Iran's pawns in this ugly war.

Iran may be feeling the international pressure, or it may be concentrating it's efforts on Pakistan where it's agents are stirring up trouble for Musharraf.

Answer 4

No one actually knows what went wrong out there.
The mystery was only expose after the mystery of us-911.
The misery can only be trace in late 2004.
Decoding the mystery since 2004 until mid 2006.
What went wrong out there is a three in one mess that happen at the same time.
The mess that got everyone at loss and blurr on what went wrong out there without a solution.
With the mess being isolated.
Then will know what to do in having the prescription for the cure.
Luke 21.22-24
Luke 24.44-45, 47-49
What do you think?

Answer 5

The death toll is higher this year. The republicans like to compare deaths to a year ago and choose one particular month to justify their numbers.

Remember, numbers can be made to say anything.

If death tolls are high, but IED attacks are down, they point out how roadside bombings are decreasing. You accentuate the positve and ignore the negative to make the "numbers" look good.

if civilian deaths are high, but military deaths have decreased, you give a press release saying.."Military deaths going down."

This whole war is the biggest U.S. disaster in history.

This war is not worth one more of our soldiers lives.

Answer 6

through fact our ineffective occupation isn't gonna end each time quickly, and Gitmo replaced into in no way closed, its nevertheless a CIA deathcamp hey Jack, you may look up some documentaries via a guy named Alex Jones- the main cutting-edge one in fall of the republic: the presidency of Barack Obama.

Answer 7

wizjp hit it right on the money.

violence is decreasing as are casualties. Of those killed in action in October, 10 of those were non-combat related (vehicle accidents, heart attacks, etc), so essentially 29 were killed by enemy action. i am in no way saying that the loss of any of my fellow soldiers, Marines, Airmen, and sailors is acceptable-- but this is a CONSIDERABLE improvement over other months. This time in 2004, there were **129** coalition forces killed in action (hostile action).

If this isn't an improvement, I don't know what is.

EDIT: And to all of you who are so wrapped up with Iraqi casualties (not to say that it doesn't bother me, because it does)... nearly all of those Iraqi men, women and children would be killed or injured regardless of whether we were there or not. The only difference is, now people care. What about the thousands of Iraqis that have died at the hands of cruel leaders, extremists etc before the war even began? Oh yeah, those don't matter. And it wouldn't matter if civilian casualties higher, no one would care, but because they want to place all the blame of those casualties on the US, *then* it is an issue. Whether we are there or not has no bearing on the fact that extremist groups like AQI and JAM will continue to kill and injure hundreds of civilians every month to intimidate them, to undermine their government, for whatever reason... but quit blaming the troops for that.

Answer 8

Yep when you route out snakes at first you will get bit.
If you pay attention the number of deaths per month are going now.
It is call progress.

More people will die on our highways this month than they would in Iraq. So by statics they are safer in Iraq than driving on our roads.

Answer 9

B/C we are fighting not an army but a group of terrorists. They hide places and drop bombs they don't stand in the open and shoot guns.

Answer 10

Sometimes I wish Liberals would read articles the choose to question. The article does answer this question. Oh yeah, no sense letting facts get in the way.......

"It's due to the troop surge, which allowed us to go into areas that were previously safe havens for insurgents," Danielson told the AP on Sunday. "Having more soldiers, and having them out in the communities, certainly contributes to our casualties."