McCain’s Surprise Iraq Visits: Then Vs. Now

* Hey, guys! Guess who’s coming to visit! [NY Times]
* Over the weekend, Senator John McCain (R-AZ), with his war-loving pals, Senators Joe Lieberman (D-CT) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC), took a surprise trip to Iraq to visit “Iraqi and American diplomatic and military leaders.”
* Remember the last trip he took, in April 2007?
* Last time: McCain walked through Baghdad’s Shorja market to show the improved security situation. What he didn’t say was that he was “accompanied by 100 American soldiers, with three Blackhawk helicopters, and two Apache gunships overhead.” [Think Progress]
* This time: CNN reports that the same open-air Shorja market is no longer accessible, even to a heavily guarded American, because “that area is controlled by the radical cleric Moqtada al Sadr’s Mahdi army.”
* Last time: America had just spent $95 billion in Iraq in 2006. [McClatchy]
* This time: America has just spent $122 billion in Iraq in 2007, with an additional $113 billion predicted for 2008. [McClatchy]
* Last time: America had just lost 822 soldiers in Iraq in 2006. [McClatchy]
* This time: America has lost 901 soldiers in 2007, and 80 so far in 2008 in the midst of a “a sharp increase in attacks resulting in the deaths of U.S. soldiers.” [AP]
* Last time: Iraqi civilians were dying at the rate of 20 per day. [AP]
* This time: iraqi civilians are dying at a rate of 39 per day. [AP]

Any candy?



How about Flowers?

March 17, 2008
Iraqi Poll: Confidence in future grows substantially
Rick Moran
"A poll conducted by several western news agencies and polling groups surveyed more than 2200 Iraiqs and found a considerable improvement in their outlook compared to a similar poll taken last August:


Improved security and economic conditions have reversed Iraqis’ spiral of despair, sharply improving hopes for the country’s future. Yet deep problems remain, in terms of security, living conditions, reconciliation and political progress alike.

Fifty-five percent of Iraqis say things in their own lives are going well, well up from 39 percent as recently as August. More, 62 percent, rate local security positively, up 19 points. And the number who expect conditions nationally to improve in the year ahead has doubled, to 46 percent in this new national poll by ABC News, the BBC, ARD German TV and the Japanese broadcaster NHK.

Without directly crediting the surge in U.S. forces, fewer report security as the main problem in their own lives – 25 percent, nearly half its peak last spring. Forty-six percent say local security has improved in the past six months, nearly double last summer’s level. The number of Iraqis who feel entirely unsafe in their own area has dropped by twothirds, to 10 percent. And with Sunni Arab buy-in, U.S.-funded Awakening Councils, created to provide local security, are more popular than the Iraqi government itself.
The idea behind the surge was correct; give the people security and their support for the government will grow. And while there has been vast improvement in attitudes, as the study points out, there is still a long way to go until Iraqis can feel entirely secure and confident about their future."

Even the liberal news orgs. have to admit the conditions are better. I know this comes as terrible news to you guys.

"Looks like we might be in a quagmire here in the United States, with all the screaming over the deaths in Iraq by peaceniks and braying defeatists everywhere, we've managed to overlook the fact that crime in many of our own cities is worse than the "violent death rates" in Iraq.

Here to put some perspective on the war's cost is Tom Blumer at Bizzyblog, " The Associated Press released an interesting set of stats (host link stored for future ref) a couple of days ago that I would suppose were designed to suck away any optimism any fools who still support the mission in Iraq might have (bolds are mine):

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Government officials on Monday reported that 16,273 Iraqi civilians, soldiers and police died violent deaths in 2006, a figure larger than an independent Associated Press count for the year by more than 2,500.
The tabulation by the Iraqi ministries of Health, Defense and Interior, showed that 14,298 civilians, 1,348 police and 627 soldiers were killed in the violence that raged in the country last year.
The Associated Press accounting, gleaned from daily news reports from Baghdad, arrived at a total of 13,738 deaths.
The United Nations has said as many as 100 Iraqis die violently each day, which translates into 36,500 deaths annually

I started digging into US murder statistics, and what I found made me less depressed about Iraq, and more concerned about the US.............

SURPRISE -- Every city and year listed had a higher murder rate than Iraq in 2006 -- except (surprise again) New York City in 1990 (Gotham's worst year on record for murder).
The murder rates were as follows (see related graph at UPDATE 2 below):

1. New York City - 1990; 30.7 (2,245 murders; population 7,322,000)
2. Washington, DC - 1991; 83.1 (482 murders; population 598,000 [1])
3. Gary, IN - 2005; 58.0
4. Detroit, MI - 1991; roughly 60
5. Compton, CA - 2005; 67.1
6. New Orleans, LA - 2006; 67.5 (154 murders; population 228,000 [2])
7. New Orleans, LA - 2004; 59.6 (275 murders; population 461,115 [3])
8. New Orleans, LA - 2003; 57.7
9. Atlanta, GA - 1973; 57.7 (271 murders; population 470,000 [1])
10. E. St. Louis, IL - 2004; 63.4




Let's start calling our Represenatives and demand that we pull out of the United States Immediately to avoid further loss of life !

How does Arkansas stack up ? According to the 2005 numbers; Per 1000 people Arkansas had a .06 murder rate. Iraq had a .56 "violent death rate" per 1000 in 2006. I don't have the Arkansas numbers for 2006 yet but the rates will probably be higher if these numbers from the Arkansas Times are any indication, "..........the 84 homicides recorded in 2006 -- bad as they seemed -- were nowhere near a record. That was in 1993, with 111, followed by 101 in 1994, 87 in 1991 and 85 in 1992 (when, additionally, population was smaller.)
But, no doubt about it, 2006 was not a good year. It was a huge jump in a homicide count that fluctuated between 45 and 65 over the preceding 10 years." Emphasis added.


These figures certainly paint a different picture than the images you see on the T.V. every night. This debate over the war is also fanned partly by those in the media who resort to outright journalist fraud to further the "quagmire" image of Iraq.

There is the ongoing Jamil Hussein story where it appears that the Ap has either fabricated a source on the ground or is getting it's info/propoganda from the enemy. The New York Times has continued the publishing of various government programs designed to catch terrorists, You had fake Iraq war vets turned peace activists who were outed as imposters (by bloggers), and then the CNN airing of an enemy video of snipers killing U.S. soilders ( and strangely getting suddenly sanctimonious over showing Saddam being hung).

This doesn't mean it's picture perfect in Iraq but war is messy and I have hope that America still has the guts for tough fights in the future. This might end up being a self fulfilling prophecy (that Iraq turns into Vietnam the sequel) to the praise of liberals everywhere. I hope not, for the sake of our country and for Iraq."



John Anderson

Why guess, Hayseed?

Get on over there!

Do it for the Glory!

Hi cedenot,

I have to question your (or John Anderson's) statement that these cities are more violent and less safe than Iraq. According to the Iraq Body Count (IBC), there were approximately 26,000 Iraqi civilians killed in 2006.
Civilian deaths from violence in 2007 :: Iraq Body Count

Iraq has ~ 27.5 million people. Do the math and you get 94.5 violent deaths per 100K people in 2006. That's significantly higher than any of the numbers listed above. And most (including the IBC) believe that their numbers are conservative, i.e., low.....because every count requires a body. Based on the most recent study that claimed a total of 151K civilian fatalities from violence since 2003 (by polling), the IBC numbers are probably half the actual total...that means in 2006, there were probably around 189 violent deaths per 100K Iraqis in 2006....that's way, way higher than your numbers above.

And FYI, the people who did the polling study felt that the 151K was a low estimate based on the fact that many people were afraid to answer questions for fear of retribution.

Now. let's look at Baghdad...and compare urban areas to urban areas. In 2006, according to the IBC, Baghdad had ~ 17,000 violent fatalities...in a city of 6 million. That amounts to about 280 violent deaths per 100K in 2006. And, again, if we double this number (IBC numbers are a low estimate), we have 560 deaths per 100K in 2006. I don't know about you, but that's not a place I'd like to walk around at night.

One last point, how much danger do you think thousands of heavily armed, extremely well-trained US soldiers and marines would face in say Washington, DC or Detroit? Do you honestly think that they would face anywhere near the danger that they have faced in Iraq and, specifically, Baghdad? The fact that we have lost 4,000 troops with many more thousands injured the past five years makes a comparison between Iraq and any American city rather silly in my mind. Don't you think?

__________________
The Lone Ranger of the AWE liberal elitists.....who was that masked man???
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


And now, I'm the Elitist of liberal Elitists...

Hayseed doesn't think.

He allows Glenn Beck to do that for him.

Oh you anti-war kooks JUST CAN'T STAND IT, can you?? How you can root for your country to fail in the war on terror and still dare to hold your head up high and call yourselves Americans just stuns me.

Shame on you!

There is no War on Terror.

If there were, our borders would be sealed.

Plus, ya can't win a War on a Tactic, period.

Goddamn, but you are Stupid.

Hi SP,

I'm just trying to make sure everyone understands the situation and the numbers involved. Because if you don't and, in your mind, water things down, we will likely repeat our mistakes.

__________________
The Lone Ranger of the AWE liberal elitists.....who was that masked man???
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


And now, I'm the Elitist of liberal Elitists...