Recently in Brookings Category

The first Lancet study was ridiculous, which meant that the hippies immediately seized on it as gospel. “100,000 people killed in Iraq”.

The latest one was even more silly.

Even the guys over at Iraq Body Count agree says the Lancet numbers are as bogus as ever.

In the light of such extreme and improbable implications, a rational alternative conclusion to be considered is that the authors have drawn conclusions from unrepresentative data. In addition, totals of the magnitude generated by this study are unnecessary to brand the invasion and occupation of Iraq a human and strategic tragedy.

After several straight months of declining casualties, casualties jumped back up to the level seen in September of last year (all graphs popup):

The big jump this month was mostly from IED deaths as you can see. Deaths from “hostile fire” is up this month as well. This was the second worse month in terms of IED deaths since last Jan:

Deaths among the Iraqi Police is steady:

So in general, things were obviously worse for our soldiers in Iraq last month. They're not as bad as they been in the past:

But still disappointing after so many months of declining numbers.

Woundings were constant:

We lowered the number of troops in Iraq slightly:

While the number of Iraqi Troops continue to increase:

I found a significant flaw in the Iraq Index data for civilian deaths. The “upper bound” is actually just the lower bound multiplied by 1.75, based on the assumption that 75% of the deaths go unreported. So I'm dropping the “upper bound” from this chart.

I've also pretty much decided this data is fatally flawed because its based on Iraq Body Count, which is based on media reports, which themselves are often guesses. The data is also stale, March's total from IBC has completely changed since I last looked at it. So here's a graph, but realize that April is probably a totally bogus number:

The car bombing data on the other hand, seems to be more up to date:

So as far as car bombings go, things are about the same in Iraq.

So bottom line, was Iraq better or worse in April? Definitely worse. Is it the worst its ever been? No, not really, things have been much worse in the past. I hope that May's numbers shows this as a local peak, but of course, I won't know what those are until June.

As for those of you who think Iraq is in a civil war, I have to say, you've never seen a civil war. Take all these numbers and multiply them by something between 10 to a 100 for a civil war. You're thinking too binary; there's a scale between peace and civil war, and Iraq, while not peaceful, is closer to that end then they are the civil war end. The number 4 is greater then zero, but its much less then 10 for Iraq's sake.

For that matter, Saddam was killing 10-20,000 Iraqis a month when he was in power, so its useful to keep these numbers in perspective. Iraq is more chaotic than under Saddam, but less deadly overall. Strange but true, but the wholesale slaughter of Saddam was worse then this retail mucking about between the Coalition and the insurgents.

Though to be honest, I wouldn't find the assertion that Iraq is in a civil war half as offensive if half of you didn't seem to be gloating. Remember your humanity guys; no matter whether you're a Democrat or a Republican, it should be a bad thing that Iraqis are dying. It will be a bad thing if America loses this war. Keep your eye on the ball.

For those of you who want world peace, well, so do we all. But its a two step process:

1. World Justice
2. World Peace

Sorry, but you have to do step 1 before step 2.

Let's hope the Iraqis respond well to their new government. Hard to believe the elections were in January and it took this long...

Technorati Tags: Brookings, Iraq

It's time for me to do my update on Iraq based on the Iraq Index from the Brookings Report. I was on vacation last week, so its one week late.

Technorati Tags: Brookings, Iraq

My last update missed an important point, which a commenter pointed out: Iraq Body Count hadn't updated their civilian deaths since the shrine bombing when I did my monthly analysis of the Brookings Iraq Index report.

Unlike the media, I like it when people fact check me. It means I learn something.

I had to wait for an update to the Brookings report, so I have new numbers for the civilian deaths in February, some new graphs about troop levels, and a new conclusion.

Bad News:

My previous post relied on the Brookings Iraq Index, which itself relied on the body count numbers from Iraq Body Count. Turns out though that IBC hasn't included any civilian deaths since Feb 22, the date of the shrine bombing. So the numbers I have for civilians are way off. They probably won't be updated for awhile, the Iraqis can't actually agree how many people died either, some say 300, some say 1300. (Note that Iraq Body Count already reports a high-low number.)

Usually these sorts of numbers are way off. 10,000,7,000, 5,000, 3,000, 2,823 people died on 9/11.

100,000, 50,000, 10,000, 5,000, 1,104 died as a result of Hurricane Katrina

So who knows what the truth will be. For that matter, Saddam couldn't be bothered to have a census, so even the past numbers on IBC which tries to be fairly conservative could be off since they're relying on press reports.

Good News:

Another blogger caught it: Liberalism without Cynicism

I said it before, but I started blogging because I subscribed to the State Department's daily briefing post 9/11 and I was shocked. The media can't even transcribe what the administration says accurately...we might be better off with stenographers then “journalists”. Someone better warn Linda that if she starts fact checking the media, she may become a Bush supporter. That's what happened to me...

Technorati Tags: Iraq, Terrorism

So with all the doom and gloom on the news, I was looking forward to the Brookings report to see what was really going on.

In February, US soldiers killed in action or wounded has gone down for the 4th straight month in a row (all graphs popup):

Technorati Tags: Brookings, Iraq

Like most of us, I'm sick of the war.

I feel like a kid in a long car trip. “Are we there yet?” Since 1920, the US has been trying to stabilize the Middle East. If Woodrow Wilson had been successful then in creating a democratic Middle East we would be facing a very different world today. Unfortunately, he was sick (its possible he had a stroke, this was long before MRIs and CAT scans); the French and British took advantage, and we're in the mess we're in today.

Unlike our news media who seem unable to see even last week, my view of the War in Iraq tries to gp at least back to 1920 when the Middle East was effectively created because the British and French wanted to play games there. This problem is 86 years old now. The solution is, and always has been for the people of the region to control their own destiny.

Logically, I wouldn't expect a problem 86 years in the making to go away overnight.

But I don't care. I want this thing over dammit. Screw logic.

Of course, what I want and what reality provides are two different things. For that matter, reality and the coverage of the war are two different things. That's why I started reading blogs and started blogging. I'm trying to get the perspective the major media aren't giving me. Since my job basically involves analyzing financial data, my contribution to all this is looking at the numbers.

Last month, I got a lot of flack for saying December was better then November. Well friends, it's all about perspective. The news media doesn't give us any perspective. Its hard to believe Iraq is getting better when you see 130 people died on the news. I realize that. But 130 people dying on a single day doesn't really mean anything without perspective.

Its harder for the insurgents to kill 130 people then it is to kill 10 or 20. It's more newsworthy for them, but if that attack means that they weren't able to carry out 19 smaller attacks that killed 10-20 people, they're doing worse. Larger attacks but happening more rarely, and in more obscure places can actually be good news. Larger attacks also piss off more of the populace because more of the “innocent” are killed, which ends up meaning more tips to the police and such.

In other words, it takes a month for me to know what is happening in a month, because from looking at the data, that's how long it takes for things to settle out. Figuring out how the war is going takes multiple months, as well as conversing with actual witnesses.

So for those who feel I'm “lying with statistics”, well, that's what the media does by denying you perspective. I'm trying to provide that perspective by asking the simple question: “Was Iraq better or worse last month?”

So bottom line, December was better then November. Was January better then December? Well, lets see. As for February, ask me in March.

Technorati Tags: Brookings, Iraq, Terrorism