Violence in Iraq down 70%

reply to post by Kr0n0s



Read the article again not just what is posted here, the article tells how the violence just move from the center of Iraq to the northern and south of Iraq.

While still is death going on in Baghdad, just that they put it at the end of the report.

Violence is an everyday thing in Iraq and our military can not cover every angle of the nation.

When the violence get worst in the south and northern part what will the military do, they will move forces around and so the insurgency will move again.

The article and the report is very deceptive and misleading.

However, in the northern province of Nineveh, there had been a 129 percent rise in car bombings and a corresponding 114 percent increase in the number of people killed in violence.

In the southern part of the nation.

While the figures confirm U.S. data showing a positive trend in combating al Qaeda bombers, there is growing instability in southern Iraq, where rival Shi'ite factions are fighting for political dominance.

I see Iraq just like a vicious cycle of violence moving around the nation as the American troops move around also.

Don't forget that the definition of combat deaths has been changed. They no longer count roadside bombs as part of the violence and being shot in the back is just, a bad day, and not considered a combat related injury or death. When you take statistics and bend them around for the news agency then yes the violence is down.
Believe me when I say this. This is not a Democrat or Republican issue. There is a 3rd force involved here. They call themselves both Dems. & Repubs. and are working for only one thing, The Military industrial complex.
They don't care about you or me they only care for money. The ONLY reason we are in Iraq is because of MONEY. Don't just look at the war issue. Look at all the issues coming down today and you will see that there are those in Washington that are outright trying to give this country away. There is nothing being done in Washington today that is for the benefit of America as a whole or it's people. And now we are fighting amongst ourselves saying, 'Democrats this' or 'Republicans that' when the reality is that we as a People are being lied to and manipulated into fighting each other while the real cause of this just sits back and laughs.
If I've said this once I'll say many more times:
The biggest threat the American People are facing and indeed the world faces, is coming from within America. In Osama's wildest dreams he could not have hoped to do what this Administration, and the National Security Agency has done. And we sit back like stupid sheep and blame one another for it and not those responsible. In the mean time those responsible are laughing at the ignorant sheep who fight amongst themselve over scraps of truth.

Originally posted by Dronetek

Originally posted by pai mei
Good. I said "the surge will never work". But I also believe that CIA is behind the bombings in the markets.
I hope violence in Irak drops even more, the US troops go home within 1 year and Iraqis live happily ever after

People like you drive me crazy. There are TONS of terrorist groups not only carrying out the bombings, but recording the action and posting it on youtube! Yet still, these people come out of the wood work to blame the CIA.

I know real terrorists (or insurgents) exist, they are fighting each other and the US, but I don't think they put bombs in their own markets to kill their own people with no control over who do they kill. I think this is done by CIA or Blackwater or the same people who did 9/11 in order to give them a reason for the war to continue




[edit on 24-10-2007 by pai mei]

Don't forget that the definition of combat deaths has been changed. They no longer count roadside bombs as part of the violence and being shot in the back is just, a bad day, and not considered a combat related injury or death.

LOL, that has been debunked for weeks now and still it comes up as fact. Amazing.....

reply to post by pai mei



You do realize that the reason they're called "terrorists" is that terror is what they're trying to spread, to achieve their goals. This means that they indescriminately kill people. They aren't surgical in their application of force, with minimization of collateral damage as a priority. They kill men, women, children, muslims, non-muslims, etc.... if it furthers their cause.

Just one of several articles you won't see on television talking about how the 'Definition' of combat deaths were changed. And it was during the surge when the number of 'combat fatalities' dropped while the number of 'hositle fatalities' rose dramatically.

www.talkingpointsmemo.com...

It's not enough to say that it's not true because you just can't hide the hard facts. We were lied to about why we needed to go to war with Iraq and now were being lied to about the number of deaths during the surge. During the surge they didn't even include the number of all the bodies being found dumped in the streets at night. Natural causes?

reply to post by BlueRaja


You know that sounds like what US government is doing in Iraq, with Black water and the hundreds of other foreign security firms that nobody is monitoring.

Let's not forget the sell out of the Iraqi nation and the biggest buyer Haliburton.

You know it doesn't take a hard thinking to see how many people has died since the invasion and take over of Iraq.

Sometimes you have to really think hard and see who is really the terrorist working in Iraq.

reply to post by marg6043


Marg- I don't think that the report was misleading, and here's why.
The 70% reduction figure was an aggregate for the whole of Iraq. While some areas have seen increases, as a whole the overall #s of attacks are down by the original figure, as you can't just look at percentages without the raw numbers that they relate to(i.e. a 126% increase over 10, isn't nearly as significant as say a 126% increase over 5000).

Originally posted by Kr0n0s
Its funny, when the news reports state that Iraq is a dismal failure or anything else negative and depressing some people embrace this as the truth 100% without anymore research or links to back it up.

That is kind of ironic isn't it? Yet, when positive news comes out of there, the same people are ready to pull out their flowcharts, diagrams and microscopes... No, there can't be any biasness there...

reply to post by marg6043


Marg- Blackwater and the other security firms aren't going out and blowing anything up. They provide PSD services for VIPs, convoys, and facilities security. I've been to Iraq and seen what contractors do, and I've had buddies that are contractors. Please spare me the conjecture of how these folks are just running around blowing stuff up and killing people to try to pin it on Islamic extremists.

reply to post by mek12


I'm sorry but it is inaccurate to say that the definition of combat deaths has changed, or that if you make it to a helicopter before you die, it doesn't count towards the total. This is a load of crap.
A combat death is, was, and always will be - a death as a result of injuries sustained while conducting combat operations.
A non-combat death would be- traffic accidents, helicopter/plane crashes(but not as a result of hostile fire), suicide, illness, or anything else not related to combat operations.
All deaths count towards to total, whether they're combat or non-combat related, as do all injuries.
There may be some question as to the cause of death, as to how to categorize it, but every death counts towards the total stats.

reply to post by pai mei


Pai Mei, to be honest, I don't think these people care enough about who they kill to want to control it. They have no loyalty to "their people." If "their people" are not of the same mindset as they are, "radical Islaimic" ideology, then they really couldn't care less if they killed them or not. If they did kill a few of their own kind, "Oh well, they shouldn't have been co-horting with the infidel."

That is the sort of mind frame these nutjobs have. They really aren't any different than the Christian fundamentalists who claim that anyone who believes differently than they do will "rot in hell." They are all of the same mindset. It's just one chooses to use verbal abuse, rather than physical, deadly abuse.

reply to post by BlueRaja

You're almost kind of sort of right blueraja, that job is apparently left primarily to western intelligence operatives, but there are more than a few instances where these contractors are shooting people and yes blowing things up under questionable circumstances at best. As to Black Water, they are mercenaries, pure and simple, mercenaries who have been given a quasi legal immunity, you're completely fooling yourself to think otherwise.

reply to post by twitchy


Contractors have shot people- I won't argue that. I will argue the circumstances in which they shot people though. I will also argue that contractors haven't blown anybody up. The only weapons that contractors have are small arms(i.e. pistols, rifles, submachine guns, shotguns, and various machine guns). They don't have have rockets, explosives, cannons, mortars, artillery, etc... They don't conduct offensive operations- they're strictly defensive in nature. You have formulated your opinion on the logical premise that-
A- you think they are Mercenaries
B- Mercenaries have been used in offensive capacities in past conflicts
C- Mercenaries will do anything for money/highest bidder, and have no loyalties to anyone or anything.
D- Since obviously you've established that they're Mercenaries, and Mercenaries will do anything for money, they must be going around and killing people indescriminately, because we obviously want to sow terror, and it couldn't possibly be Muslim extremists, because there's no historical precedent for them to behave in such barbaric manners.

This is what's known as circular reasoning, whereby you use your opinions as evidence to support other opinions, referencing the aforementioned opinion as source material.

Like I said previously. I HAVE been in Iraq. I HAVE seen what contractors do. I HAVE buddies who are/have been contractors.
You're wrong about intel agency missions too.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Contractors have shot people- I won't argue that. I will argue the circumstances in which they shot people though.

Unless you were there, or somehow made privy to all circumstances of the MULTIPLE incidents, then yeah, all you're going to be able to do is argue about it. To date, not a single contractor has been on trial for murder, in fact they have been granted defacto legal immunity there.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
The only weapons that contractors have are small arms(i.e. pistols, rifles, submachine guns, shotguns, and various machine guns). I will also argue that contractors haven't blown anybody up. They don't have have rockets, explosives, cannons, mortars, artillery, etc...

A Milkor USA M32 MGL (Multiple Grenade Launcher) blows things up, for example.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
They don't conduct offensive operations- they're strictly defensive in nature.

LOL that's why they are being phased out and investigated I suppose. Hey what do you think Blackwater was doing in Fallujah? Defending themselves? Uh, No.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
You have formulated your opinion on the logical premise that-
A- you think they are Mercenaries
B- Mercenaries have been used in offensive capacities in past conflicts
C- Mercenaries will do anything for money/highest bidder, and have no loyalties to anyone or anything.
D- Since obviously you've established that they're Mercenaries, and Mercenaries will do anything for money, they must be going around and killing people indescriminately, because we obviously want to sow terror, and it couldn't possibly be Muslim extremists, because there's no historical precedent for them to behave in such barbaric manners.

You really have a poor understand of the term mercenary don't you? Here's a little peak...
Federal prosecutors are investigating whether employees of the private security firm Blackwater USA illegally smuggled into Iraq weapons that may have been sold on the black market and ended up in the hands of a U.S.-designated terrorist organization, officials said Friday.
You're right, they will do anything for money.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
This is what's known as circular reasoning, whereby you use your opinions as evidence to support other opinions, referencing the aforementioned opinion as source material.

huh?

Originally posted by BlueRaja
Like I said previously. I HAVE been in Iraq. I HAVE seen what contractors do. I HAVE buddies who are/have been contractors.

I was in the Control Center for the Apollo Space Flights, and I don't know diddley about launching a manned mission to the moon. I was also once in a Wendy's restraunt, but I don't really know the reicpe for their Frostys. I used to have a friend that worked at Boeing making Satellites, and wouldn't you know it, I don't know the first thing about orbital solar panels.

Originally posted by BlueRaja
You're wrong about intel agency missions too.

No, I'm not.
www.google.com...
Mossad agents in Iraq
Do you know who was in charge of US forces in Fallujah at one time, Major General Natonski, a Mossad liaison. Wonder why?
israelis training kurds in iraq
CIA death squads operating in Iraq
British Special Forces Caught Carrying Out Staged Terror In Iraq?
False-flag operations in Iraq
Fake Al Qaeda

[edit on 24-10-2007 by twitchy]

reply to post by Dronetek


violence in iraq has subsided so when can our troops come home?we cant stay there forever ?or is the administration going to stay to keep the peace as in south korea?and what about the next war assuming it is to weaken irans capacity to overthrow its neighbours as saddans intentions were to control the oil they have?-------its hard to not believe iran is going to be dealt with------unless their leadership finally come to their senses and make a deal-------even if they keep it quiet to save face?

reply to post by yahn goodey


Don't worry Haliburton will never allow for the Iraqi conflict to end they need their blood.

So as soon the report have congress asking for troop retrieval, rest assure another increase in violence will escalate so we may have to add more troops to the pot.

reply to post by yahn goodey



The reality is that we will probably always have troops in Iraq. It will probably be a Korea type scenario, yes.. Like it or not, that is probably what it is essentially going to boil down to.

reply to post by twitchy



Maybe I should've been more specific with regards to the weapons Blackwater uses while in Iraq. You do realize that in addition to contractors being downrange, that Blackwater has ranges that the Military, Law Enforcement, etc.. use here in the states, for training and evaluation. That grenade launcher you linked is being evaluated by the military, but it's not a piece of equipment that Blackwater employees downrange are carrying.

As for the incidents where there have been shootings- no, I haven't been on site at each event, and neither have you, so your argument has some flaws there.

As for the death squads, terrorist teams, etc... can you provide me any evidence from sources other than the
World Socialist Website, Prison Planet, Huffington Post, Daily Kos, etc...?
You may as well use Pravda, the Pyonyang Tribune, or Al Jazeera as source material.

You honestly don't remember the British SAS getting busted shooting at Iraqi police and hauling around a car load of explosives, then getting broke out of jail by the Coalition forces? It was widely reported. I'm sorry you missed it, quite the scandal.
Why don't you make a list of acceptable news outlets so I don't waste time tyring find any that would please you?
Here's some more mainstream articles so you don't have to subject yourself to any anti-war sentiments. www.telegraph.co.uk
Iraqi security officials on Monday variously accused the two Britons they detained of shooting at Iraqi forces or trying to plant explosives. Photographs of the two men in custody showed them in civilian clothes.
Now before you call this an isolated event...
Google It
And you're right I wasn't there either, I rely on the same media coverage you do, but I'm not the one contradicting what has been widely reported. They are mercenaries, they are killing civilians there, and they are in hot water for it. That's the bottom line. You can call my logic into question, but unless you have something concrete that absolves Black Water of the wrong doings of which they stand accused by the very government that hired them, then perhaps your own logic fails.
You want mainstream sources for the dirt on black water?

Source
BAGHDAD (AP) - The Iraqi government remains determined to expel the Blackwater USA security company and is searching for legal remedies to overturn an American-imposed decree that exempts all foreign bodyguards from prosecution under local laws, officials said Wednesday.
Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's government accepted the findings of an Iraqi investigative committee that determined Blackwater guards, without provocation, killed 17 Iraqis last month in Nisoor Square in western Baghdad.

Is Ms Magazine unbiased enough for you? lol

Source
Blackwater Accused of Tax Evasion
Rep Henry Waxman, D-CA, chair of the House oversight committee, asserted Blackwater USA may have violated US tax laws and possibly defrauded the federal government of millions of dollars.

Source
State Department security chief resigns
WASHINGTON — The State Department's embattled security chief resigned on Wednesday as the scandal over last month's deadly Blackwater USA shooting of 17 Iraqis in Baghdad claimed its first political casualty.

The resignation came amid growing questions about the use of private contractors to protect diplomats in Iraq.

Richard Griffin, the assistant secretary of state for the Bureau of Diplomatic Security, made no mention of the furor in his resignation letter to President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. But his decision to step down came at a time when the department is facing withering Iraqi and congressional criticism for its security practices.

Source
Iraq revokes immunity for foreign security firms
(Xinhua)
Updated: 2007-10-24 23:47
BAGHDAD -- The Iraqi government said on Wednesday that it has decided to revoke the immunity from prosecution that the foreign security firms enjoyed in the violence-plagued country.

They aren't even accountable to themselves anymore...

Source
Blackwater Withdrawal Ends Inquiry
By RICHARD LARDNER – Oct 12, 2007

WASHINGTON (AP) — Blackwater USA has ended an inquiry into the private security contractor's performance by withdrawing from an industry group that initiated the review after the company's guards were accused of killing 17 Iraqis in Baghdad last month.

The International Peace Operations Association said in a statement Friday that Blackwater withdrew its membership two days after the group decided to examine whether the contractor's "processes and procedures" complied with the group's code of conduct.

Source
Blackwater PR firm aided Chalabi; Works to polish AT&T's image
The firm that "coached" Blackwater CEO Eric Prince for a Congressional hearing previously represented Iraq intelligence launderer Ahmed Chalabi and is now working with AT&T to repair their image in the wake of their involvement in President Bush's warrantless wiretapping program.

The communications firm BKSH, a subsidiary of public relations giant Burson-Marsteller, is run by a man with extremely close ties to the Bush Administration.

The founder and current head of BKSH is Charlie Black,

They sound like a great bunch of guys...

Black Water isn't the only questionable gang of security contractors (mercenaries) either...

Source
Almost three years ago, Boone, a Westminster resident, was fired by MVM, a private firm that holds lucrative contracts in Iraq and elsewhere to provide security services for American government officials. The ostensible reason for the termination was that he "did not fit in" with the rest of his six-man detail providing escorts in Baghdad under a Department of Defense contract. But a lawsuit Boone filed claims that he was dumped because he refused to go along with an "after-action" report that lied about a 2004 firefight with insurgent snipers — an account designed to cover up the fact that a member of the team had fired indiscriminately into a residential building.

People are starting to figure it out though....

Source
Blackwater protesters behind bars