Monday, March 21, 2005

Body counts are poor strategic metrics

Lex noted below that it is not so easy to track Iraqi Security Force (ISF) casualties. For some reason – probably because it demonstrates that America is winning - the media are ignoring the mounting ISF role in defending Iraq. That role includes mounting casualties among the ISF.

What’s even more interesting is the media’s willingness to ignore terrorist casualties in Iraq. In fact, going one better than just ignoring terrorist’s casualties, it seems that the MSM is lumping the terrorist body count in with what they call “Iraqi dead.” This might explain why the media and other know-nothings keep harping on the figure of 100,000 dead Iraqi civilians. Two-thirds of that number are probably terrorists. Half of the remaining one-third are probably terrorist’s victims.

Contrary to George S. Patton’s famous quote, the way to win a war is not always by making “the other poor bastard die for his country”. After Vietnam, the American military got away from the body count method of deciding who is winning a war. Even in Lex’s posts below, he notes that the metric for whether or not we’re winning in Iraq is the not the number of terrorists casualties, but rather the number of ISF casualties. Strategic goals are not always achieved by racking up the highest body count.

In Iraq our strategic goals are going to be achieved by:
1. The creation an effective ISF.
2. Formation of a representative Iraqi government.
3. Restoration of basic services throughout the country.
4. A referendum on an Iraqi constitution.
5. Formation of a free and fair Iraqi judiciary.

Iraq seems to be moving apace in the first three categories. A vote on number four is scheduled at the end of the year and trials are slated to begin soon for Saddam and his Baathist murderers. So, in spite of the MSM’s doom and gloom forecasts, the hard work in Iraq is paying off – not only in Iraq but throughout the region.

No comments: