Combat Deaths Down
Apparently it’s a mystery:
WASHINGTON — American combat deaths in Iraq have dropped by half in the three months since the buildup of 28,000 additional U.S. troops reached full strength, surprising analysts and dividing them as to why.
U.S. officials had predicted that the increase would lead to higher American casualties as the troops “took the fight to the enemy.” But that hasn’t happened, even though U.S. forces have launched major offensives involving thousands of troops north and south of Baghdad.
American combat casualties have dropped to their lowest levels this year, even as violence involving Iraqis remains high.
Military officials and observers are wondering whether the lower U.S. casualties are a sign of success or an indication that insurgents and militiamen simply chose a different battlefield when the Americans mounted their offensive in Iraq’s capital.
“Nobody here is doing cartwheels yet,” said one senior military official at the Pentagon, who requested anonymity in order to speak freely.
One British analyst, using the example of the British drawdown of forces in southern Iraq, suggested that the lower numbers may mean that American troops are irrelevant to the many conflicts racking Iraq: ethnic cleansing of neighborhoods in Baghdad, massive bombings of religious minorities by Sunni Muslim extremists in northern Iraq and Shiite-on-Shiite-Muslim violence in southern Iraq.
Instead, he suggested, Iraq’s armed factions and politicians already are thinking beyond the troop buildup.
“Everyone is preparing for what happens” after U.S. forces leave, said James Denselow, an Iraq specialist at the London-based Chatham House, a foreign affairs research institute.
Apparently, it’s because the enemy is winning in ways that cannot actually be detected. Or, that the enemy will be winning later, after we surrender. I think that’s what they are trying to say. It couldn’t possibly be because the Bush strategy is more successful than anyone dared suggest it might be.
In fact, there have been some much-heralded spikes in combat deaths as Americans engaged. But the turning of the tribes, a revolt that continues to spread, has dramatically cut violence in ways that were not anticipated when the surge was first announced. Combat operations north and south of the city have been highly successful. Al Qaeda operations in key areas have been terminated, and leadership has fled, attempting to spark bloodshed elsewhere.
It’s a war. Battlefields shift. But sometimes, the taking of territory, defeating the enemy, reducing one’s own losses is actually an indicator of pending victory, rather than defeat. Hard concept to grasp, I know.
Hang on, here we go. Struggle to comprehend continues:
Supporters of the troop increase say the lower casualty figures show that the larger number of troops and the counterinsurgency approach of Gen. David Petraeus, the latest U.S. commander in Iraq, have turned Iraqi citizens against armed groups, putting them on the run and fracturing them.
“The population is progressively turning to coalition and Iraqi forces and making a positive difference in bringing security to their towns, villages and neighborhoods. They are pointing out extremist leaders, identifying caches and IEDs (improvised explosive devices) and asking to be a part of the legitimate Iraqi security force,” Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno, the No. 2 commander, said last month.
Segue to bad news:
Others, however, noted that while U.S. combat deaths have dropped, deaths among Iraqi civilians have remained constant and the “ethnic cleansing” — the street-by-street homogenization — of Baghdad’s neighborhoods has continued almost unabated.
An oversimplification at best, and I’m not sure either of those things are entirely true. While spectacular attacks have continued, various reports have also indicated shifts in frequency, means and location of attacks under pressure, while also indicating some stability, return of refugees.
While the Shiite Mahdi Army militia has lowered its profile in the capital, it’s battled the rival Badr Organization of the Supreme Islamic Iraqi Council for control of southern Iraq. Two southern provincial governors have been assassinated, many allege by the Mahdi Army. In northern Iraq, suspected Sunni insurgents killed more than 400 people in a coordinated attack on two villages, the largest terrorist act since the 9-11 attacks on New York and Washington.
“We know a lot of them have left Baghdad,” the senior Pentagon official said.
Understanding why American combat deaths are down is important, because the verdict on the buildup is a driving issue in the growing domestic debate over what to do in Iraq.
Extremely important this month, as surrender enthusiasts work up their talking points in the face of defections, expected bad new from Petraeus.
Opponents use the lower casualty figure to argue that American troop deaths aren’t worth the security gains in Iraq, while supporters say the figure shows that Iraqis are moving toward supporting the U.S.-backed government of Prime Minister Nouri al Maliki.
Most agree that a second reason for the decline is the dramatic change of conditions in Anbar province, where former Sunni insurgents have teamed up with American troops to rid the province of the group al Qaida in Iraq. About one-third of U.S. casualties have been in Anbar province, but that’s shifted since the troop increase began. In August, about 10 percent of U.S. casualties occurred there, compared with 30 percent in January, when the buildup began.
Here’s something interesting:
Since the war began, Pentagon statistics have shown that combat deaths often rise at the beginning of major military operations and drop in subsequent months.
Work with me here … aggressively fighting a war you’re engaged in, as opposed to not fighting it, works. OK.
In May, when four of the five additional brigades were in Baghdad, there were 123 combat deaths. By June, the number fell to 93, then to 66 in July and to 57 in August, according to the Web site iCasualties.org, which keeps the most up-to-date statistics on Iraq casualties.
Loren Thompson, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute, a Washington-area research center, warned that reducing the number of troops could lead to an increase in casualties. He said the drop could be because the size of the built-up forces intimidated Iraq’s various factions.
“Ironically, we may lose fewer soldiers the more we have exposed” to combat, Thompson said. “A large U.S. combat presence might reduce casualties by intimidating the enemy.”
Topics: Iraq, al qaeda, military
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 8:47 am on Monday, September 3, 2007
7 Responses to “Combat Deaths Down”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
September 3rd, 2007 at 10:27 am
“A large U.S. combat presence might reduce casualties by intimidating the enemy.”
Duh.
September 3rd, 2007 at 11:55 am
It’s pretty simple: the enemy inflicts most casualties on US troops via amushes and IED attacks. If we’re taking the fight to them, they’re on the back foot, so they can’t plan such attacks. And any suggestion that US combat deaths are down because of reduced insurgent activity is pure nonsense: last week I counted 88 enemy KIA in three days, and that was just deaths reported in MNF-I press releases.
September 3rd, 2007 at 12:53 pm
Excellent posting!
In lieu of a trackback, here’s my post this morning citing this entry:
http://burkeanreflections.blogspot.com/2007/09/iraq-combat-deaths-decline-building.html
Also, here’s some information on the “September Surge” of pro-victory rallies, which begin today:
http://burkeanreflections.blogspot.com/2007/09/proud-marine-would-head-back-to-iraq-if.html
Thank you!
Have a great holiday!
September 3rd, 2007 at 2:03 pm
I can understand not accepting good news at face value, especially in a war, but some people are looking for bad news in the good news. That strikes me as being cynical beyond redemption.
September 3rd, 2007 at 3:34 pm
Winning will do that to casualty figures. The left just don’t get it.
September 3rd, 2007 at 4:45 pm
[...] blogging this story: Captain’s Quarters, Jules Crittenden, Wake up America, Back Talk, The American Street, Sister Toldjah, Burkean Reflections, [...]
September 3rd, 2007 at 6:05 pm
The Surge and Where Do We Go From Here
This doesn’t mean that everything is peachy - the Yazidi massacre of 500 Iraqis by al Qaeda shows that the terrorists can still inflict serious pain on the Iraqi people, but they can’t keep that kind of tempo going - not in the face of an ongoing mil…