Over 19,000 Served
That’s the total of dead “militants”* in Iraq since 2003. USA Today:
More than 19,000 militants have been killed in fighting with coalition forces since the insurgency began more than four years ago, according to military statistics released for the first time.
The statistics show that 4,882 militants were killed in clashes with coalition forces this year, a 25% increase over all of last year.
The increase in enemy deaths this year reflects more aggressive tactics adopted by American forces and an additional 30,000 U.S. troops ordered by the White House this year.
I’d like to see the same numbers for Afghanistan, where the Taliban’s feared 2007 offensive appears to have resulted in a Taliban:Coalition death rate of about 100:1.
In Iraq, perhaps due to failure to engage more aggressively and with consistent counter-insurgency measures over the past four years, 19,000 dead have come at a cost of more than 3,800 American lives. That’s about 5:1. A heavy toll, though U.S. fatalities numbers, after spiking as the surge was implemented, have been dropping as counter-insurgency measures take hold, and hopefully we’ll see those numbers improve. This year, we’re currently running about 6:1. In 2006, when aggressive tactics were used in the two Fallujahs and Najaf, the rate of terrorist to friendly death was 8:1. This year, its running 6:1. In years of less aggressive U.S. offensive action, it ranged fom 1.2:1 (2003), to 3.8:1 (2005) and 4.7:1 (2006).
Killing terrorists, we are told, just inspires other people to become terrorists. Although not killing them doesn’t appear to discourage terrorism. Hmmm, what to do? I say kill more!
The numbers game has its limits as a useful measure. What would be more interesting to see this year is how many people have been removed from the insurgency, compared to prior years. Given the large numbers who reportedly are opting out in Anbar, Diyala, Triangle of Death, this year’s kill ratio is more significant. Those nearly 5,000 are likely to include a higher number of hardcore, terrorist jihadis, foreign and domestic, as opposed to local anti-U.S., anti-government insurgents.
* I generally prefer the non-PC “terrorists,” though “insurgents” is acceptable for the diminishing number of those not interested in blowing up marketplaces. “Militant” just has an icky, euphemistic feel to it. It must be the term’s overuse in years past to describe really angry students, feminists, etc.
Topics: Iraq
Posted by Jules Crittenden at 9:43 am on Sunday, September 30, 2007
3 Responses to “Over 19,000 Served”
Leave a Reply
Trackback URLYou must be logged in to post a comment.
September 30th, 2007 at 10:32 am
Killing terrorists, we are told, just inspires other people to become terrorists.
I would say radical fanatics preaching in mosques are what inspires other people to become terrorists. Lefties like to talk about “root causes”, there’s one right there.
September 30th, 2007 at 11:04 am
I prefer to call ‘em terrorists as well, although I accept that some of them are in fact insurgents (i.e., Iraqis fighting to expel foreign forces, not Saudis too bored to hang around Riyadh). But they aligned themselves with terrorists, and deserve the title. This is changing, but the blood is on their hands. Maybe they can atone for it, but we’ll have to wait and see about that.
September 30th, 2007 at 5:29 pm
There is another cause. The primary cause is the nature of Islam itself, and those who use it to impose Islam on the world. It is the nature of the nihilism, with its moral equivocation, that rule the thinking of too many in the West.