Is Maj. Gen Caldwell telling the truth?
There may be nothing here, we may have captured a year's worth of Al Qaeda in September, (a resounding success,) but these numbers jump out at me. (Maj. Gen Caldwell is the US military spokesman in Iraq.)
First: Christian Science Monitor Oct 3, edition.
Those numbers jumped out at me, from January to mid-September, 630 captured. Now, let's jump to this morning's briefing.
Either almost all those captures in the first quote occurred in the first two weeks of September, the second half of September was overwhelming, or one of these statements is false. I find the first hard to believe because of all the arrests following the Zarqawi killing.
The first answer appears to have been given after a question on the NIE finding that Iraq is creating terrorists, so a low number would make a better answer. The second statement appears to have followed a question similar to, "but what are you doing about the violence?"
Two different political needs, two different answers?
I recognize this is a small point in the grand scheme, and it is certainly possible that both statements somehow mesh together, but I think this captures how "metrics" are being used.
First: Christian Science Monitor Oct 3, edition.
Between 50 and 70 foreign fighters sneak over the border into Iraq every month, Maj. Gen. William Caldwell, chief US military spokesman in Iraq, said last week.....
Between January and mid-September, US or Iraqi government forces captured some 630 foreign fighters, according to General Caldwell.
Those numbers jumped out at me, from January to mid-September, 630 captured. Now, let's jump to this morning's briefing.
He also said that Iraqi and U.S. forces had killed more than 110 al Qaeda militants in September and detained more than 520....
Either almost all those captures in the first quote occurred in the first two weeks of September, the second half of September was overwhelming, or one of these statements is false. I find the first hard to believe because of all the arrests following the Zarqawi killing.
The first answer appears to have been given after a question on the NIE finding that Iraq is creating terrorists, so a low number would make a better answer. The second statement appears to have followed a question similar to, "but what are you doing about the violence?"
Two different political needs, two different answers?
I recognize this is a small point in the grand scheme, and it is certainly possible that both statements somehow mesh together, but I think this captures how "metrics" are being used.
7 Comments:
Man, you're incredible. You sense, smell out, add up, and generally report, what no one else is seeing.
Thanks. We all owe you for information that no MSM or any other outlet is serving up.
By Motherlode, at 10:50 AM
Thanks a ton. I was actually just thinking about pulling this down because it was so esoteric.
I won't. Funny, though.
Mike
By mikevotes, at 11:56 AM
Those foreign fighters may have been in the country for a while. The war has been going on for 40 months now, right? It's something like that, I think. Plus, the 50/70 number might be the rate at present. The rate may have been far greater or far less at other points in the war.
Caldwell seems, at least as this point, like a straight shooter.
By Bravo 2-1, at 2:59 PM
Generally, yes he does.
I don't know why I clipped the inflow numbers into this post, maybe to include his name title.
I was more interested in the second paragraph of that excerpt.
I think you're right that the current inflow is probably (far?) lower that at previous points such as around Fallujah 2004. In fact, Al Qaeda has been encouraging their followers to go to yemen and Somalia, so I would accept that as true.
(I can't find a quick link for Bin Laden's call for his followers to fight in Somalia, but I do have this one.
http://bornatthecrestoftheempire.blogspot.com/2006/09/heads-up.html
)
I was more interested in the captured numbers. I was trying to imply that Caldwell was selecting his data to support his needs offering a less that truthful picture.
That could be accomplished by a straight shooter, because the time frames may have been offered or implicated by the questioners I don't know. (There's also perhaps a definitional issue between "Al Qaeda" and "foreign fighters.")
I just found the captured numbers were very odd. Between Jan 1 and Sept 15, 630 captured. Between Sept. 1 and Sept. 30 , 520 captured.
That's just a really odd distribution that makes me question it.
THANKS for the question/criticism.
This is why I like blogging. I like testing ideas, and I really wish I got more fact/argument criticism. (I don't need trolls, though.)
Mike
By mikevotes, at 4:07 PM
Great points, Mike. I see both your implications in number selectivity and also your point about this sudden flush of detainees.
Colonel MacFarland of the 1AD said that Ramadi has seen some recent success. Maybe he meant this, maybe not. It's difficult to get a great picture based on these quick q&a's.
I agree with you on that great aspect of blogging. Thanks for your comments on my page, I appreciate your input as well. Feel free to email me for background chit chat, sein dot und dot zeitz at-sign gmail dot com
By Bravo 2-1, at 4:35 PM
Or you can type out your email and I will decline to publish in the comments.
By Bravo 2-1, at 4:44 PM
That's a good trick. In the middle of something. I'll do it tonight.
Mike
By mikevotes, at 5:13 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home