Thursday, June 25, 2009 - 9:56 PM

On the eve of the pullout from cities, everything appears calm. Except in Mosul, which is a special case. As is Basra. And Kirkuk. And now east Baghdad.
A friend passes along this day report from the Iraqi capital:
1. Three mortar rounds landed in Abu Nawas Street close to the 14th of July bridge, the mortars landed on the residential area known as the solar energy apartments wounded three civilians and caused material damages to parked cars.
2. An IED exploded in Al Hurria Square in Karradah resulted the injury of three civilians
3. An IED exploded in Al Baladiyat area of E Baghdad targeting on foot patrol of Iraqi Army, Iraqi Army officer was killed and two civilians were injured
4. IED exploded in Orfali sector of Sadr city without casualties
5. An IED exploded near Al Shaab football stadium of E Baghdad targeting US Army convoy without knowing if it caused casualties
6. An IED exploded in AL Bayaa Bus Station of SW Baghdad resulted the death of 2 and injury of 4
7. An IED exploded near Al Shaab Football stadium also targeting US Army convoy in the same spot, resulted the burn out of one Humvee.
8. An IED in Ur injured two civilian injuries, and a magnetic IED attached to a van blew up and injured three more civilians. No end to it today, it seems."
I sure am glad this war is over.
tommigodwin/Flickr
. . . I just don't know what to do with this data. Is this a sign of "unravelling"? In the sense that it's sectarian, or political rivalries? Or--pace Kilcullen's observation that al Qaeda wants us over there--is this designed to keep us there?
Do people remember April 09? Bombs went off, deaths went up to the highest level in months. Is Iraq falling apart? Is the sectarian war reigniting? Then May comes around and it's the lowest casualty numbers since the 2003 invasion. Now there's a spate of bombings that goes along with the U.S. withdrawal at the end of this month, and it's a repeat. Is Iraq unraveling? Is security falling apart?
If the insurgents are able to keep this up for more than 1-2 months than you have a possible change in the security situation. Otherwise it's their way of letting everyone know that they're still around. Iraq will probably have violence for the next 5-15 years.
It's logically invalid to argue from anecdote.
Journalists would do well to study basic logic.
New Orleans, La. is supposedly the 3rd most murderous city in the world, ahead of Baghdad; are we unraveling?
And what about Caracas and Cape Town?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/americas/12/31/Venezuela.murder.capital/index.html
Would you please expand on your comment that it is logically invalid to argue from anecdote? I honestly don't understand it.
Thanks,
Tom
Tom - what blue is saying that "the plural of anecdote is not data." Just because there are a number of IED incidents in May-Jun does not reflect that the US situation in Iraq is either getting better or getting worse. The incidents don't mean anything unless you want to view them in context of IED incidents over time and against whom they were directed. Lots of people die in the Middle East. So what? Doesn't mean there is a "war" going on, just some serious lack of security. Is that supposed to be news?
Just for the sake of argument, there are those who think that indeed the plural of anecdote IS data, at least from the standpoint of developing scientific hypotheses. But I digress.
I think it was Warren Stroebel . . .
. . . who said this morning that you saw the same thing with Israel's withdrawal from Gaza--a lot of violence, designed as part of the propaganda war, to make it look as if the insurgents are forcing them out.
(6)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE