Surge Math

Justin Logan makes many good points including most notably:

But the most damning fact about the "surge is working" narrative is that the violence in Iraq always has been cyclical, with dips in violence occurring every year in the months from January through March or April. So, in fact, the decline in violence Kagan observes was entirely predictable, and indeed was predicted. The Pentagon's own "Measuring Stability and Security in Iraq" report pointed out that by the end of 2006, the violence in Iraq had reached its highest level since the war began, and so the downtick should be viewed in that context. But what appears likely to happen is what has happened since the beginning of the war: these temporary downticks do not stop the overall upward trend of violence in Iraq. See page 20 of the most recent "Iraq Index" from the Brookings Institution for glaringly obvious proof of this ratcheting up of violence in the country.

Let's just say I don't share the optimism of the Always Wrong Brigades or their allies among the 101 Fighting Keyboarders.

Comments

I won't go so far as to say the surge isn't working, although it would be silly to have high expectations for its success. But to say it's working before it works in April, May, June, July, is just plain bullshitting.

Posted by RT | March 18, 2007 10:41 AM

RT, before you go so far as to say anything about the surge "working," perhaps you could define for us what "working" means? i, for one, do not think that a drop in violence from horrific to terrible is a sign of anything "working," for example....

Posted by howard | March 18, 2007 11:24 AM

I think what RT is saying is that no one is in any position to judge yet whether it's been successful or not. However, howard, if the surge was responsible from dropping violence from "horrific" to "terrible"--presuming in your definition that terrible is lower than horrific--that seems like it would be "working", no? Not to say the war would be working, but the incremental surge.

Posted by right | March 18, 2007 1:26 PM

right, the "surge," such as it is, is being sold not as a means of improving horrific to terrible but as a means of winning the war.

since "winning the war" is a meaningless construct that exists only in the minds of george bush and rightwing enablers, the surge isn't going to help in the slightest on its supposed aim.

Posted by howard | March 18, 2007 6:55 PM

That's an angle I hadn't thought of on the surge. I just wasn't cynical enough. And I should know better. I remember when my hometown downtown merchants were complaining about the traffic in whores affecting Xmas shopping. (It had been an unusually mild winter, and the working girls had spread out from their usual Waren Street haunts to cruise the shoppers.)
The police chief went on TV on a Tuesday and sternly warned the working girls that if they weren't off the sreets by Friday, there would be hell to pay. This was before 5-day weather forecasts had become standard news broadcast fare. Friday morning brought normal Syracuse December weather (something like Finland) and the streets cleared. Mission Accomplished!

Posted by CJColucci | March 18, 2007 9:26 PM