According to the DoD, both US soldier and Iraqi civilian deaths have declined significantly since the US surge took effect. From KUNA:
The rate of killings of US troops in Iraq has been on the decline, down by 60 percent, since the launch of the new security measures in Baghdad, according to statistics revealed by the Multi-National Force -Iraq Combined Press Information Centre.
Only 17 members of the US military in Iraq have been killed since February 14 till March 13, compared to 42 from January 13 to February 13; the rate was on the decline during the first month of the security crackdown, compared to a month before.
Two of the 17 soldiers died at US Baghdad camps of non-combat causes.
The remarkable decrease in killings among the US troops came at a time when more of these troops were deployed in the Iraqi capital, especially in districts previously regarded as extremely hazardous for them such as Al-Sadr City, Al-Azamiyah, and Al-Doura.
Meanwhile, US attacks on insurgent strongholds north of Baghdad curbed attacks against helicopters. Before the new security plan, many such craft were downed leaving 20 soldiers dead.
The US army in Iraq had earlier said that sectarian fighting and violence in Baghdad had dropped sharply, by about 80 percent, since the launch of the plan.
[…]
The statistics excluded US troops killed in other governorates such as Al-Anbar, Diyala, and Salahiddin.
Kuwait News Agency? Man, tracking down Anna Nicole’s baby daddy, covering for CAIR, and ginning up a new Administration non-scandal must be keeping the US press really busy these days.
Asks Ace:
The information [about the decline in deaths] comes from the DoD. It was fed to the media. Why is it only a Kuwaiti outfit publishes it?
I’m tempted to believe he’s being rhetorical.
(h/t CJ Burch)
****
update: with thanks to happyfeet, here’s the AP’s take:
U.S. military combat deaths have also declined, according to an AP count. 24 members of the military were killed in Baghdad from Feb 14 through Mar 14, compared with 29 from Jan 13 through Feb 13. Overall nationwide, there were 68 U.S. military deaths from Feb 14 through Mar 14, compared with 112 from Jan 13 through Feb 13.
Somebody might want to alert the Commissar…
Ah, what the hell. I’ll do it.
That’s unpossible!
LOL…Unbelievable but unfortunately quite believable at the same time. They don’t even try to hide it anymore.
BTW, Jeff I bought a bottle of 12 year Aberlour (the wife wouldn’t go for the “two for comparison’s sake” reasoning!). From the very first sip, it was VERY good. I could get used to this. Again, thanks for the advice.
No problem. Try either Laphroaig (very peaty) or The Balvenie Doublewood (very smooth and mild) next.
Maybe the dreaded American MSM remembers last March, March of 2006, when the fact that “only” 31 U.S. military personel lost their lives in Iraq was claimed as proof our plan was working?
Or maybe they remember the March before that, March of 2005, when the fact that “only” 35 U.S. military personel lost their lives in Iraq was claimed as proof that whatever our plan was back then was working?
Unfortunately, IMO this is a function of our telegraphing this “surge” so effectively.
Oh, the Balvenie Doublewood is already on the list, waiting to be bought. Ohio must not think the Laphroaig acceptable, as it is not available in our liquor stores.
Oh, and OT, but any submariners around who can shed some light on today’s comm-loss-to-sub story? Sounds awfully strange to me.
Glenfiddich 18 YO … their 12 YO is p!ss, but the 18 …. yummy.
Wait a second, more troops, yet fewer troop deaths? Someone better get Fox Butterworth on that one.
Maybe the dreaded American MSM remembers last March, March of 2006, when the fact that “only†31 U.S. military personel lost their lives in Iraq was claimed as proof our plan was working?
Or maybe they remember the March before that, March of 2005, when the fact that “only†35 U.S. military personel lost their lives in Iraq was claimed as proof that whatever our plan was back then was working
Or maybe they remamer 10,000 casualties on June 6th, 1944…. And decided to ignore the fact that casualties do happen, and losses can be preceived as being relatively light, when compared to other periods of time.
alphie,
35 in ‘05, 31 in ‘06, and 17 in ‘07. Thank you for making it look like an even more successful trend.
If I didn’t know better, I’d think you just did a little cheer for our squad.
Maybe they remember the death of over 20 school age children in one year in Philadelphia, and are just as clueless about the causes and resolution of violence in the metro beat as they are in the mideast.
Maybe they remember about as much as you Alphie. Which ain’t much.
I hate to point out that we’re only 14 days into March of ‘07, alp, and “only” 34 U.S. military personel have lost their lives in Iraq so far.
Meaning, this is shaping up to be the deadiest March so far, including March of ‘03, when we invaded Iraq.
Do you really hate it alph?
Jesus are you stupid alphie. You won’t read the links people give you, and you won’t even properly read the text on the FREAKING POST IN FRONT OF YOU.
Let’s review-
Only 17 members of the US military in Iraq have been killed since February 14 till March 13
Look stupid- that’s a whole month. Not 13 days.
Do you even know how to read?
So has Helen Thomas died?
Tman gets my vote for “Most Righteous Alphie Smackdown”
Text YOUR vote to: PUNK-ASS
[Alphie moves goalposts in 4……3…..2….]
Off-topic, but the Glenns have another perspiration-soaked screed up, with more sneer quotes per unit point than I think I’ve ever seen, out of an outlet like Salon.
When addressed to the Curiously Wrong™ alphoid, that imperative is entirely unnecessary. As is the similar but not identical “be stupid.”
Then again, he needs to be reminded to breathe, so, it’s all good.
Looking at the DoD site, I count 68 member of the US military were killed in Iraq between February 14 and March 13.
Unless the DoD is wrong, I think someone needs to checks their figures.
Speaking of the Glenns, I seem to recall that there was some objection to people labeling ideologies, rhetoric, etc as leftist or left-wing, as though that were a bad thing.
And now Glenns’ doing the converse of that. Nothing but cheering from the studio audience, so far. Whose ox is being gored, and all that.
factually incorrect.
embarrassing.
71 American troops have been killed (mostly from hostile cause) in Iraq since Feb. 14.
A commenter at Ace checked the article, and apparently the “17” refers just to Baghdad, or some other subset.
I only point this out because I want America to fail.
The Commissar-
Please don’t get alphie disease. Apparently there is no known cure.
The study you referred to at Ace’s says “The statistics excluded US troops killed in other governorates such as Al-Anbar, Diyala, and Salahiddin.”
See? Reading is fundamental.
I wish the old Commissar would come back.
Not even that number is correct, Tman.
::shrug:: I’m assuming, from what I read in the Press, that the “surge” is going extraordinarily well.
That is, I read nothing in the Press about it, one way or another, which nowadays is as good as a front-page story. In fact, they’re ready to leap like starving lions on the least scrap of anything that does not pertain to Iraq, going so far as to actually cover the fact that there appear to be cracks in the “consensus” over Global Warming. They have to have something to fill the pages between the brassiere ads, and to talk about between the Depends™ commercials, and since there is nothing, absolutely nothing happening in Iraq the best controversy they can dig up is the anti-Algore faction.
Regards,
Ric
What I find interesting is that no matter what the numbers are people such as Alphie will always decide the news from Iraq is bad and we must
get the hell out as fast as we canbring our beloved troops home.If the numbers go up, EEK!, we getting our ass kicked and if the numbers go down, YAWN, it doesn’t mean anything because we’re still losing troop, i.e., we are losing.
Alphie et al, God love you because our troops and the Iraqi people won’t.
Tman
Well done sir well done….
Look’s like we’re winning when even the LATimes publishes an article that the MNF Commander can walk down a street in Ramadi to shop at a candy store.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-ramadi14mar14,1,2010029.story?track=rss
I just read the DOD reports. Via Icausualties.org, the numbers are listed as follows.
Military Fatalities: By Month
Period US
3-2007 33
2-2007 80
1-2007 83
12-2006 112
11-2006 69
10-2006 106
These are higher numbers than 2006, but not 2005. The numbers are what they are, but the fact remains that overall attacks in the more dangerous areas of Iraq are down due to the surge in troops. Just ask mookie.
And alphie is still an idiot.
Just an old school conservative, mRed.
The cost of a year’s surge is now estimated to be $27 billion.
If you look on page 624 of this 3861 page .pdf file, you’ll see the annual budget of the police department of New York, a city of over 8 million people, is just $2.4 billion.
So the “Surge” into Baghdad, a city of 6 million people, is going to cost 10 times more than the entire budget of the N.Y.P.D.
Whether crime in Baghdad drops a bit during the “surge” seems completely beside the point to me.
Alphie,
Just stop man. Seriously, you just continue to make yourself look even more retarded.
Make a mental note -(oh, I see you’re out of paper!) You cannot compare Iraq with Manhattan, unless you are, well, an idiot.
If I asked a penny for your thoughts, you’d probably give me change.
Now go away or I shall taunt you a second time.
Is there an insurgency going in on NYC we should be battling, Alphie?
Commissar —
Have I ever accused you of wanting America to fail? And why is your post here nearly identical to the post at Ace’s? You haven’t taken to running around posting in the comments to every blog that cites this story, have you?
Anyway, I updated the post to include the paragraph that appeared further down in the story, so that people who don’t feel like following the link won’t be confused by my post.
Combat deaths in areas where the surge is taking place are decreasing. Which is why the post was called “Surgeometry.”
Gee, wonder if logistics have anything to do with that? How many tanks and Bradleys does the NYPD have? M16s? I wonder what the NYPDs close air support is like?
Apples to orangutans.
Funny, I have been a working old school conservative for maney years in politics and I have never heard of you nor have I heard any “old school conservative” spout the tripe you do. Well, except the one guy that always showed up in a plaid suit and an American flag tie, but…..
The last time I checked we had , let me see, no police in Manhattan killed by snipers or ieds. Come on alpo, get in the fight or just get out of the way………
This just in from the all Alphie, all the time network:
Senseless violence continued in the streets of New York today, as fundamentalist Yankees and Mets fans engaged in sectarian violence. (If you don’t think that this is sectarian, you’ve never been to New York)
Mayor Bloomberg called for a cessation in the strife to allow for talks to break the free agent impasse that sparked the carnage. The NYPD has renewed its claim that they control the streets, but the recent attacks on the Yankee shrine in the South Bronx indicated otherwise.
Despite the Administration claims that the chant “I love New York” can be heard, it was drowned out by the grim war cry, “Let’s go Mets!!”
Iowahawk would do this so much better, but as a former New Yorker, I had to at least try it.
[Setting aside the non-starter comparison to NYC and wishing you a 2 for 1 sale on Doanes pills for your back, Alph. Those goalposts must weigh a TON, man.]
As a percentage of the Federal Budget, that’s chump change. Of GDP? It’s practically accounting error.
When we finally get around to doing the NORKs, Iran and Syria we’ll long for the days when we did Iraq so affordably.
Let’s ignore the fact that the surge soldiers’ pay and the cost of their equipment doesn’t even count in the cost of the surge (that comes out of the regular defense budget).
Let’s also ignore the fact that New York is the most expensive city in America to live in, whereas Baghdad is a rather cheap place to live.
The functions of New York city police officers and our surge soldiers in Baghdad is essentially the same.
Where is the enormous cost of the surge coming from?
I have to wonder what sorts of droppings alphie would leave if he actually had a world-view?
Do you ever wonder what life would be like if you’d had enough oxygen at birth?
Let’s ignore alphie.
I didn’t say the soldiers’ job wan’t more dangerous, than a New York City police officer, Tman.
I’m saying they aren’t doing anything that would justify the cost of deplying them being over 10 times what it costs to deploy a cop.
It’s not like the soldiers are getting the extra million dollars to be there.
So, what kind of mile-high berm would be suitable for NYC, then, alphie?
And are you also going to attribute the failings in Central Park and policing on the lower East Side to some action back in the 19th or 18th Century?
You’re an “old school conservative” and you don’t where the high costs of military operations come from? How old are you because I starting to think you pricing out stones and cross bows. Or, maybe you’re calculating with a crayon.
Tamping down the Sunni-Shi’ite shite while rolling up Al Qaeda is what? Chopped liver?
Just curious, alph–do you want AQ brought to battle?
Cordially…
Heh.
Look mRed,
The average resident of Baghdad manages to get by on about $1500 a year.
Our soldiers’ pay and the cost of their equipment is paid for out of the regular Defense budget.
Why is it costing the American taxpayer $750,000 a year (or over 500 times what it costs an Iraqi to live there) to put up our soldiers in a city with a rather low cost of living?
Figure that out and you may see supoort for the surge surge.
It’s possible that by “old-school conservative” he means Buchananite paleo-con. Which would explain quite a bit, actually.
Such as the brain damage and utter inability to learn.
No, you said they were “essentially the same”. Even for you, that was a pretty stupid statement.
I’m saying they aren’t doing anything that would justify the cost of deplying them being over 10 times what it costs to deploy a cop.
That statement is like a mountain of stupid. Just out of curiosity Alphie, how many Army officers are from Baghdad? Now, compare that to the number of officers that work and live in New York.
Do you see yet why that is such a stupid argument?
If ignorance is bliss, you must be the happiest person alive.
1) Soldiers do not get a downward cost-of-living adjustment.
2) Soldiers get combat pay. Their regular pay comes out of the regular budget; does the combat pay?
3) They’re using ammunition, putting extra wear on equipment, and using up other expendables at a faster rate than they do at peacetime.
4) All their food, fuel, ammunition, mail, amenities, and personal effects have to be transported in on a long supply line.
5) Soldiers, commanders, advisors and others have to be moved around on a purely military transport system. There are no civilian airlines to piggy-back on like stateside, Europe, or Korea.
Once more, you’ve demonstrated that you’re not just ignorant, you’re an idiot.
Robert, please, while I don’t think much of Pitchfork Pat, I doubt even he would be so consistently shtoopid to the level that alphie is.
I mean, the idea that because the locals live on $1500/year, therefore American troops should be costing about that? While I doubt Pat understands all the ins-and-outs of economics, I suspect even he wouldn’t make such an asinine comment.
Worst of all, alphie’s talking about college applications. Either he’s a high schooler (conceivable), or his kids are going to college—in which case I really really feel pity for them.
Imagine the impact when they realize what level of dufus their parent is, once they encounter the real world.
Okay little “a” & what would be the cost to supply police protection for NYC from say San Diego, which is over 3,000 miles away. Remember you now have to feed, clothe, provide medical care, sleeping accommodations, entertainment, communications, transportations, laundry, religious services, etc for them? Possibly double what it costs to pay locals in NYC & that’s within the US?
Care to compare the individual costs between NYC & Iraq? According to Wikipedia, the NYPD is about 37,838 strong, costing about $63,428 & change per member; whereas the US Military’s force of roughly 140,000, costs about $171,428 or a little of 2.2 times as much as NYPD. Let’s not forget the laundry list of things the military has to supply to its members that the NYPD doesn’t have to (see my brief & wholly incomplete list above), that budget figure you stated also includes the training & support of the Iraqi military & police forces as well on top of taking care of the initial $140,000. Suddenly the costs of supporting, supplying & having troops on a different continent isn’t much more than the costs of maintaining a police department within the US & the localized force doesn’t have the workload or danger that the troops face daily.
At best you point shows that we re over-paying for the police in NYC or at worst, under-paying to support out troops abroad.
The 2 are unrelated & your arguments are just getting more convoluted & stupider w/ each comment you post. We get you are against the war & we won’t change your mind, but your points are just pathetic & irrelevant. Here’s a thought try actually thinking through just one of your positions or arguments before commenting here. You make actually make it through a thread w/o having been proven totally wrong & border-lined retarded.
All their food, fuel, ammunition, mail, amenities, and personal effects have to be transported in on a long supply line.
Robert, our troops aren’t stationed at the North Pole or on some Pacific atoll, they’re stationed in one of the biggest cities in the world.
If we’re shipping things like food, fuel and amenities to them from America instead of buying them locally, well…I sure would like to have that contract.
I’d get the job done for, say, a mere half a million dollars per soldier per year.
Funny how alph’s all about saving money, and never mind dead Iraqis and Americans.
“Buy food locally.”
Yeah, that’ll work. And when a mass poisoning occurs, what then?
Oh, wait. Bush’s fault. No problem, as far as you’re concerned.
I keep thinking that there is no way that alphie could say something even more retarded than his previous statement, and yet he continues to prove me wrong.
Alphie, you are a pacifist out of necessity in a battle of wits.
But I do appreciate that you can take the abuse so well. I assume it comes from years of practice.
Let me guess, using secret Chinese Shipping Containers. Go away little man.
How are the Iraqi refineries going? Are they providing enough to fulfill the local demand? Does Iraq as a whole import fuel?
Do Iraqi refineries produce the proper grades our equipment needs? I’d hate to put the wrong fuel into a jet my life was dependent on, hate it even worse if other people’s lives depend on it.
Does Iraqi agriculture produce enough food to supply the local demand and the demand of the troops? Do they produce food the troops will eat? Are their standards of production acceptable to the troops? And, as John pointed out, how do you ensure safety of locally-acquired supplies?
Does the local industry produce the amenities the troops want? And, again, how do you ensure the safety of the material? Local delivery trucks would be great big gaping holes in base security, especially if they were carrying sealed containers produced in local factories.
Eventually it will be possible to draw from local suppliers. See, for example, Germany and South Korea. However, for the time being, it’s not a prudent choice.
He’s like an Olympic-class fool.
Nah. Alphie’s right on this one. I have to admit it.
We should have nuked the place 3 years ago. Would have been WAY cheaper.
Now, Robert, who’s being stupid? I mean, Iraq sits atop a vast POOL of oil. It’s why we went to war there.
You just stick a pipe in the ground, and pump the stuff directly into the tanks, jets, and helicopters (you might want a filter to keep the sand out).
So, I’m sure that fuel, at least, in alphie-world is already taken care of.
And who cares what the troops want? Bush sent ‘em there, so they should just eat what all the locals eat, just like in NYC, if a cop wants pizza, and he’s in a non-pizza zone, too-bad/so-sad. (Notice, too, that cops have to pay for their food, whereas troopies get it for free. Whazzup with that? I’ll bet alphie’d be charging them troops, since they’re gettin’ three-quarters of a mil apiece, ya know?)
We’re talking over $2000 a day worth of food, fuel and amenities for every soldier, guys.
Unless it’s being shipped via, say, the moon, I think the costs could be cut back considerably.
I think most of our troops would be happy to take an extra $1000 a day in pay while they’re stationed in Baghdad and find their own food and gas.
And the cost of the surge would be hlaved, making us fiscal consevatives happy.
Abso-f**king-lutely amazing.
I post a sarcastic comment, and alphie manages to top it.
alphie, you’d have troops trying to buy food and fuel off the local market? What, you’re gonna have a platoon of M-1s pull into a service station and say “Fill ‘em up?”
Do you even have half a clue as to what the fuel capacity (never mind type of fuel) goes into an M-1?
And they let you breed??
Oh.
Mah.
Gah.
All their food, fuel, ammunition, mail, amenities, and personal effects have to be transported in on a long supply line.
Robert, our troops aren’t stationed at the North Pole or on some Pacific atoll, they’re stationed in one of the biggest cities in the world.
If we’re shipping things like food, fuel and amenities to them from America instead of buying them locally, well…I sure would like to have that contract.
I’d get the job done for, say, a mere half a million dollars per soldier per year.
Posted by alphie
Just stop. OK? You have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. Period. Let me make this clear. You are a fool. Learn how to keep your chocolate rimmed cakehole shut and listen when people with vastly more experience than you, talk.
You either aren’t or never had paid attention in school and you watch entirely too much TV.
Alphie,
What does the civilian cost of living in Iraq have to do with the cost of the war in Iraq?
What is the amount of money being spent by Iran, Syria, etc. and all of the other countries that would benifit from our loss in Iraq. Figure the cost of defeating the enemy, not the comparison of local economies.
If we are pushed out of Iraq it then becomes easier and cheaper for them to push us out of Afghanistan because the Islam fanaticals wouldn’t be fighting a two front war.
alphie, this statement truly applies to your comments in this thread, more, I suspect, than any other, including the asinine mile-high berm/floating anti-missile barrier:
TW: all63 as in: Please, alphie, give all63 of your neurons a chance to actually fire, in sync, before you post next?
All I see are a bunch of big-spending liberals defending the huge cost of one of their programs that, in all likelyhood, is actually making things worse.
No doubt there are countless crony contractors providing these overpriced services to the American taxpayers and pocketing considerable profits.
Having our troops so disconnected from lives of ordinary Iraqis also contradicts the counterinsurgency manual written by the guy running the surge, btw.
Nothing like mingling with the people to root out the bad guys.
OK, maybe not Buchananite. LaRouchite? Bircher?
Hey, little alpea… our troops are BUSY… chasing bad guys, okay?? Or do you think they should forage as they go about their work? Maybe confiscate it from the locals? That’d be WAY cheap!!
BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!!
Halliburton beat ya to it! No wonder you have no respect for our VP.
TW: Gotta hand83 it to him, he does get consistently stoopider.
I’m beginning to wonder if this particular Alphie is a ringer for the regular alphie. Because even by his standards, these comments are mind-boggingly stupid.
Is that REALLY you alphie? Or did you let your dumber cousin online with your user info? What you are lacking in intelligence, you are more than making up for in stupidity.
He’s one of the cavemen not offended by those GEICO ads.
This is a clever locution.
Also, to state the obvious, complaints about cost are another sign that liberals are worried about the success of the surge.
Wow, this thread took a surreal turn. Declining troop deaths is always good news, regardless of the cost-analysis. And I’m sure I read about this earlier today in the mainstream media; can’t remember where offhand.
You didn’t hear it on NPR, cynn, that’s certain.
That’s alphoid for you.
Clearly the point is that the troops should just find an apartment in the city with the natives and eat at local resteurant and get gas at the local shell and then turn in expense reports. I guess. Should they also keep receipts? After all its a city with a low cost of living, should save lots of money, right?
I’m trying to google this many ways, but am only finding irrelevant newsbusters links. I also discovered Irag the Model, which is one of the most agonizing sites I have run across.
I just hope and pray that this surge helps the greater cause. Americans often refer to this conflict as “our” war to lose; to me it is not. It is ultimately the Iragis who will prevail or fail. I happen to think we have made a foolish bet. But once the dice are on the table, I can’t take my money back.
cynn – I hope you don’t mind if I offer a suggestion to you. I don’t know if you ever read Michelle Malkin, but she’s away for a few days and invited several milbloggers to guest post in her absence. I think if you follow some of the links there you’ll find reading material to restore hope in your heart.
I mean this sincerely… Iraq the Model can be quite heartbreaking sometimes, but one of those milbloggers pointed me to a site the other day that truly was heartwrenching. It was written by a 19-year-old girl whose fiance was killed in Iraq in February. To me she seems the antithesis of Cindy Sheehan, totally unwavering in her belief that her true love was lost serving a good cause. (If you want the link without giving MM’s site a hit, let me know and I’ll look it up for ya.)
TW: one19 Sheesh! How did Jeff get the code to my security gate, which just happens to also be part of my debit card number? I’m beginning to understand how Jim Carey feels about 23.
AP is out with their take:
Thanks, BornRed, I’ll follow up. Oh, and I just noticed in my previous post that I referred to “Iragis,” which is a brand new race I invented just for fun.
You know, when you think about it, Iraggin on the Model could be the next big reality show. You know, where we could all vote in, predicting the hotness of chicks under burkas. Just a thought.
The DoD report is bullshit.
Just take out the filler and what do you get?
http://www.attytood.com/2007/03/matt_drudge_rules_their_worlda.html
Now go ahead and call me names boys. But eventually you’re going to have stop deluding yourselves.
mark,
The Drudge link, the title of the article & the story were about the changes in where… here I emboldened the location for you.
Now I can see where you & Mr. Bunch might get a little confused. I mean Baghdad was only mentioned 8 times throughout the article or title, & certain words weren’t in all CAPS making it harder for members of your side to maintain focus. But don’t you think that if the Drudge link & the article it linked to was about the decreases in Baghdad & not all of Iraq, you may be – this is just a suggestion mind you – a little off on the whole “deluding” aspect? Unless of course you are referring to the obvious delusion we were maintaining about your reading comprehension. But given the beating your whole procurement argument took, I guess we can give you a little leeway, to be cordial & all.
mark,
Or maybe we should institute a new law requiring words defining location or subject matter be repeated, what say 10 or 12 times before we expect you to comprehend & apply them to the remainder of the article? Heck, most of us were impressed you attempted to read the article at all, I know I was. You’ve come a long way in a week mister & we are PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD PROUD of you. Now if only we could little “a†to realize that cost differences between a police department’s budget & sustaining a war in another country aren’t really related… I think we can all feel GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD GOOD about what we all accomplished this week.
Who knows in another week we, together, may work on your actually applying relevance to making a point when commenting on a blog. I know it seems really hard at first, but you must remember you are not alphie & you shouldn’t let his lack of progress retard your accomplishments, after all he is limited being an “old school†conservative & all.
mark,
I just bought BAGHDAD on less than $40 a day from Lonely Planet.
There are a couple of cool sounding little backpacker hostels the troops can all stay at. And if the little falafel stand on the corner of Uday and Saddam hasn’t been blown to shit by a suicide bomber they can all eat there
Sssssssssshhhhh SteveG,
If mark can’t be bothered to interpret an 8 paragraph article, where 5 out of the 8 actually mentioned Baghdad out-right, 1 out of 3 of the remanding paragraphs references the “Iraqi capital†& 1 of the last 2 mentions that the statistics do not incorporate the rest of Iraq or causalities occurred, how can we expect him to consume an entire book? Of course that last, really confusing paragraph, is where little “a†got stuck on his dates, but overall the most “cordial†thing to do is to encourage the little buggers further on. You know, FOR THE CHILDREN!!!
Well, OK markg8, if you insist. I’m all for accommodating courteous requests.
You’re an ignorant shithead.
Feel better?
Thanks a lot SteveG. That last comment of yours made me laugh out loud and people here at work are giving me dirty looks.
Do you suppose alphie has the slightest clue as to how thoroughly he’s been thrashed in this thread?
Look for recent news stories regarding one “West, Kanye.”
Remember alphie, amateurs talk strategy, professionals talk logistics. Though I don’t think you’ll be mistaken for either.
Pman this is a lie:
It’s the first two graphs in this whole story, as far as most of you wingnuts will read because that’s all you want to hear.
Hear is the actual number:
Silly insults aside you guys need to wise up. You’re being sold a bill of goods and our soldiers, we taxpayers and our nation are paying a huge cost for it.
So you’ve decided arbitrarily that we are deluded because you have again arbitarily decided that we’ll only read the first two paragraphs. Even though PMAIN just examined the entire article thus disproving the assertion you made. And you manage to come to a third conclusion that this is a bill of goods, even though the eeeeeevil neocons who are doing the bidding of the pesky jews in the White House didn’t write this.
If the Lancet published this, would that untwist your panties?
mark,
“Troops in Iraq” define which troops as opposed to the “troops in Hawaii” or “troops on the deathstar.” I’ll admit the article is poorly written, but the numerous uses – as in more than one – & the title pretty much sum up that the article, the point & information presented is about the decline in BAGHDAD & not in Iraq as a whole… hence the paragraph, within the article, that clearly states “The statistics excluded US troops killed in other governorates such as Al-Anbar, Diyala, and Salahiddin.” It helps if you actually READREADREADREADREADREADREADREADREADREAD the article in its entirety.
Now produce a link to an official source or something more respectable than another guy who, amazingly enough, cannot grasp that an article that lists or references BAGHDAD within 6 of 8 paragraphs, you might actually be close to making a point. Funny how no other media resources have a US causality list, from BAGHDAD alone, that proves the DoD’s report is false. Part of the point that that Jeff was making as well.
Funny thing is you aren’t be sold anything, you’re making crap up as you go along. Good luck w/ that, because you sure have convinced me.
markg8,
See, you fall off the swing right off. The post is about the efficacy of the surge. The surge has to do with Baghdad. Efforts in the rest of the country are basically on hold, because it has been postulated that the capitol needs more attention right now.
Now given the focus of the original post, and the background on the surge, add in that several people have pointed that the focus of the cited article is also on Baghdad, this statement:
just about sums YOU up.
You need to find out where the vastly self-esteemed but demonstrably half-vast Dr Haggerty and his band of merry pranksters bask in sunny, Daiquiri induced stupors and apply for membership. You’ll be very comfortable in a crowd where authorial intent is subject to the reader’s interpretation as viewed through said readers feckless preconceptions.
Ho hum…Another thread and another complete undressing of everyone’s favorite idiot, *lph**, and the new clown in town, markg8.
BAGHDAD!!!!!!!!!!!
You have a good site, i enjoyed my stay!