You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #12: my $.02 [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
frogcycle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-27-07 11:32 AM
Response to Original message
12. my $.02
the whole damned thing - all 56 months - has been manipulated.

The level of US casualties is a direct function of what missions they send troops on.

The crushing of Fallujah caused a huge jump. Like the invasion itself a year earlier, that was a war of choice. The excuse of the killing of the four Blackwater contractors was just that - an excuse - to get the public to cheer "right on, go get 'em" as we obliterated a town because some of its people resented the invasion and demonstrated that in the ugly, violent way that is typical in the local culture but horrified us.

That added fuel to the whole thing, made it clear we had a "long way to go," enabled more institutionalization of the occupation.

In mid-2006 as opposition to the war was becoming ever more vocal, midterm elections were on the horizon, and fatalities were ebbing (the six-month running average had dropped to 68/month, lowest since pre-Fallujah) the need for a "surge" was invented. To support that, they started conducting more missions that exposed our troops. It suddenly became essential to search out more "insurgents." The Humvee/IED fatality rate started up. By November the six-month monthly rate was up to 79. That was a gamble that may have backfired - the antiwar flames were fanned as much as were the "go get the bastards" fervor that had been hoped for. Be that as it may, the "surge" went forward, coupled with more and more of those risky missions, and billeting troops in forward outposts where they were more vulnerable.

The six-month running average/month was 105 by May '07, where it stayed through September.

That was all a contrivance. In reality, most people who said early on that we had become the catalyst and needed to get out to get the violence to abate were correct. The problem for the admin was, if they heeded that early on, it would have showed that they never should have made the mess in the first place. No, they had to make it much worse, take a lot of casualties, so John Boehner could say "small price to pay." Then when they did what they should have four years earlier, and just stopped looking for trouble, coordinating that with the predictable reduction in Iraqi-Iraqi violence as the venting of age-old animosities ran its course as predicted, and localized ethnic cleansing was accomplished, they could claim that their trumped-up "surge" made it happen.

It's kind of like knowing an eclipse is coming, and telling a bunch of primitive people you have great supernatural powers and are capable of hiding the sun, then putting on some sort of performance to "prove" it.

Now they can point to the brilliance of their "pacification", "democratization", "bullshitization" PNAC world view, and use it to rationalize doing the same to Iran.

You are absolutely correct in being nervous. This is the calm before the storm. This is a dog-and-pony show just like the FEMA "press conference," designed to get the sheeple to rubberstamp the next unprovoked war of imperialist aggression. The 3838 US military deaths are just so many poker chips to them.

They have brutalized Iraq about as much as they can; it is losing steam as an excuse to continue war. We're going after Iran. Soon. Bet on it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC