But here's the fun part. The methology used by the GAO is also used by the intelligence community:The U.S. military's claim that violence has decreased sharply in Iraq in recent months has come under scrutiny from many experts within and outside the government, who contend that some of the underlying statistics are questionable and selectively ignore negative trends.
Reductions in violence form the centerpiece of the Bush administration's claim that its war strategy is working. In congressional testimony Monday, Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, is expected to cite a 75 percent decrease in sectarian attacks. According to senior U.S. military officials in Baghdad, overall attacks in Iraq were down to 960 a week in August, compared with 1,700 a week in June, and civilian casualties had fallen 17 percent between December 2006 and last month. Unofficial Iraqi figures show a similar decrease.
Others who have looked at the full range of U.S. government statistics on violence, however, accuse the military of cherry-picking positive indicators and caution that the numbers -- most of which are classified -- are often confusing and contradictory. "Let's just say that there are several different sources within the administration on violence, and those sources do not agree," Comptroller General David Walker told Congress on Tuesday in releasing a new Government Accountability Office report on Iraq.
Senior U.S. officers in Baghdad disputed the accuracy and conclusions of the largely negative GAO report, which they said had adopted a flawed counting methodology used by the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency. Many of those conclusions were also reflected in last month's pessimistic National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq.But we all know what this administration really feels, deep down in its collective guts: Statistics only reflect "reality" and "reality" has a well known liberal bias.
Meanwhile the killing continues.
21 comments:
John K. says: And Sen. Schumer says the military is incompetent. The guy he voted to run the show doesn't know what he is doing. Come on here lefties, tell me again how support the troops and are patriotic.
tell me again how support the troops and are patriotic.
Huh? What are you Chickenhawks drinking this time of day?
Is the VFW open for everybody this early, or just for armchair infantry?
The Bush administration and the GOP in general will continue to use bogus numbers and squishy statistics...because they think it works. And, for the most part, it has. They have no problem utilizing all the tools of modern marketing to "sell" their narrative. We shouldn't be surprised, we shouldn't expect it to ever change.
We should do our best to debunk it all...
Piltdown Man
John K. says: Yo Shitrock, Rep. Kucinich does to Syria and talks to the terrorists and refuses to meet with the troops. Tell me again how patriotic the left is and how Sen. Schumer supports the troops. VFW?
John, unless the cheap alcohol has completely wiped out your memory, you probably recall the day you graduated from elementary school. Remember how proud your Mom was? She would be so disappointed now to realize that your cute little brain is unable to absorb new information. She remembers how much promise you showed before you discovered that the VFW admits Chickenhawks. (She was also quite disappointed when you told her that instead of enlisting you intended to get drunk for a few months, but we won't get into that now.)
So set down the Schlitz for a sec, and really, really knuckle down in a forlorn attempt to learn something:
I don't give even 0.06374 shits about what Schumer, Kucinich, Clinton, Clinton, Casey, Rendell, Ravenstahl, or any other Democrats do or don't do. You really can't bait me with the patriotic, unpatriotic, or jungian behavior of Democrats. I just don't care.
I admit, it's a little annoying that you waste trillions of precious electrons trying to get a rise out of me, but it won't work. If Barack Obama is discovered to have held up a seven-year-old girl at gunpoint for her lunch money, I say "Yeah? So?" See, the effect of your efforts is simply to delay your journey to the bottom of the nearest mug.
So look at the advantages of cutting it out: You get to chug your booze that much sooner, you save electricity, and you get the opportunity to win back a tiny bit of the affection you have so obviously missed from Mother.
OTOH, if you keep doing it, you and I can continue to enjoy both your unintentional humor and my witty repartee. So, either way works for me.
I am curious about something, though. What exactly is it that "Rep. Kucinich does to Syria?" Is it, you know, like, dirty? Did you watch? Was it like what Senator Craig tried to do with that cop? Was your Mom involved at all?
John K. says: I see Osama Bin laden (D-Pakistan) has endorsed the opinions of Sen. Schumer. Shitrock have you ever said anything good about our military? Or do you just enjoy the protection they provide. 6 years without an attack on our soil, go Bush. He took the fight to the enemy. Now I would say 'we' but shitrock hates the US and our military so I can't include him in that statement.
The VFW sells cheap booze?
Dammit...
I won't say this again: XRanger and I served, John. How bow chu? Or do you simply enjoy supporting the troops by watching them die?
I guess you go to the blogs with the record you have, not the record you'd like, huh? And you Shirkers complain about libs over here so you don't have to get shot at by AyRabs over there.
JOhn K. says: Shitrock try to focus on the discussion. Talking about personal life events in a blog makes no sense. Nothing can be proven one way or another. So I am not interested in your personal life. Still have not heard you praise the military or the United States. Or decry what Sen. Schumer said.
So I am not interested in your personal life.
What a coincidence, Chickenhawk. I'm not interested in what you're not interested in.
That's a typical leftie liberal in Kucinich for you. He does to Syria and feels no shame for it. One could understand if he does to Sweden or even Norway but Syria? Damn him.
John K. says: Now this is funny. The latest Osama Bin Laden tape did not threaten Republicans or conservatives, he threatened you liberals and Democrats. He is pissed at you Democrats for failing to follow his orders on Oct 2004. He expected you to impeach Bush and surrender in Iraq. He even helped elect the Democrats majority in Nov 2006 and here we are in Sep 2007 and we have 30,000 more troops in Iraq than when he issued his warning. You lefties need to get going and stop the talk. He expects you to walk the walk. Osama Bin Laden (Democrats-Pakistan) aligned with Jim McDermott and John Murtha. That is funny.
Would someone please wipe the drool from John's chin? He seems to be having a bad reaction from the KoolAid again.
John K. says: The al queda caucus of the Democrat Congress is really angry that Bush got elected in Nov 2004 and that Nov 2006 did nothing to reverse this. Osama Bin Laden (Dem-Pakistan) has ordered certain things be done and he expects that. So keep bad mouthing Bush and the war. This helps ensure an al queda win in the mid-east. They can't beat us any other way regardless of what Sen Schumer says. That means you shitrock.
This helps ensure an al queda win in the mid-east.
No worries. Messrs. Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld took care of the American defeat years ago, with the help of millions of other Chickenhawks who love to watch American soldiers die to make the rich ones richer.
Speaking of Osama, did you ever wonder why they gave Osama the easy getaway? Hmmmm?
Ladies and gentlemen;
I think John K has just shown us that he's completely nuts - either that or he's just pulling our collective legs.
I'm hoping it's the latter, I fear it's the former.
Davoe, let's not confuse "crazy" with "stupid" or "inebriated."
Mr Schmuck;
I stand corrected.
:-)
DaYvoe
John K. says: Well you can tell when the comments hit close to home. The left resorts to its usual tactics. Not one of my arguments has been refuted. You can't, they are backed up facts. Who bad mouths the troops, Schumer and Bin Laden. Who constantly calls for us to surrender, Murtha and Bin Laden etc. Good thing we have those 'chicken hawks' running the show, you lefties would have sold into a sultanate of Islam. Bush/Cheney/Rumsfield took the fight to the enemy. You lefties wanted the ACLU lawyers to fight it for you. And you use the term chicken hawks. Hey speaking of ACLU, how about that Head of the ACLU for the great state of VA. Convicted of child porn. LOL LOL This is way too easy.
John, I don't know where you came from, but you are absolutely the best thing that has happened to this blog since I started here. You are better than Master Lie -- just slightly more rational, so there is something to make fun of, but still as stupid as a bucket full of hammers, and as predictable as a Republican politician at an underage cross-dressers' convention.
What can we do to keep you coming back? Personally, I would chip in a couple of bucks a month to have you show up in every thread.
Thanks again for all the fun, and give our very best regards to the other Chickenhawks at the VFW. Do you suppose we could get them to join us too? Probably not, huh? Most of you guys can't read.
I just wanted to chime in here in regards to the City Paper article in which you were recently featured. You said, with respect to Dr. Ron Paul, "Fuck him," apparently because you disagree with the notion of repealing Roe v. Wade. However, Roe v. Wade is an unconstitutional decision the Supreme Court had no business ever making. Ron Paul is, yes, personally pro-life, BUT, he says it is not his right or anyone else's right in the FEDERAL government to decide what you do with your fetus. It is up to the STATES to decide that.
Repealing Roe v. Wade is the BEST thing we could possibly do for this nation, because it would allow the federal government to STOP ALL THIS BICKERING over abortion, it would make abortion stop being a NATIONAL issue, and it would allow the Congress to focus on matters of national importance rather than state and local importance. That is what their job is supposed to be.
By contrast, giving the right to decide this kind of an issue to STATES is a huuuuuge step in the right direction because it gives states a great deal more power. This will help move this country away from being entirely beholden to a big, centralized federal government. Liberal states can decide to allow abortions, maybe even provide FUNDING to women who need them due to ectopic pregnancy, rape, or other emergencies. Conservative states, by contrast, can choose to ban abortion.
Your obvious resopnse would be, I think, "Fuck that," because it might happen to be the case taht PA will outlaw it. However, if that happens, all you have to do is go to the next state over to get an abortion. It beats the hell out of having to move to a completely different COUNTRY, and the way things are going at the national level, I think it's just a matter of time before the neocon block bans abortion at the national level. THEN what the hell are you going to do? "Kick and scream?"
So yes, I can see how you'd be upset that Dr. Paul wants to repeal Roe v. Wade and that he is personally pro-life, but I think if you seriously re-examine what he's doing, you will see 2 things: first of all, he is not in the business of being a big, bad, powerful governmental official, so he's not going to try to SINGLE-HANDEDLY overturn Roe v. Wade. As president, he would say he doesn't have that kind of power and doesn't WANT it. He would just suggest to the Congress and the Supreme Court that the issue be re-examined. Secondly, if it DOES get overturned, this immediately gives states the right to decide for themselves what their stance is on the issue. This certainly doesn't mean 100% of a state is going to agree, but it does mean you can still be an American but have a choice rather than being FORCED to be one way because the federal government says so.
I should note for the record that I am a male, yes, but I am also strongly pro-choice because as you said, I don't think anybody has any business telling a woman what she does with a fetus that is growing in HER body. As such, as soon as Roe v. Wade is overturned, I would be writing to my local and state governments weekly to encourage them to make PA a liberal state that allows abortions.
Maybe this post earns me "Fuck you" status, but I hope you can at least see my side of it. I can see yours.
Namaste,
Dave Stratton, strattond@duq.edu
Post a Comment