Evidence that the Army and Marines have learned better how to protect troops in Iraq
Monday, January 23, 2006 at 6:05PM ARTICLE: “Attacks in Iraq jumped in 2005: Insurgents widen aim to Iraqi forces,” by Rick Jervis, USA Today, 23 January 2006, p. 1A.
You’re wondering what my point is with that title, right?
Attacks are up from 26k to 34k (04-05), but since the 277k Iraqi security personnel now outnumber the U.S. troops in the country, they take the bulk of the hits.
Over 2700 Iraqis died last year, compared to 673 U.S. troops (down from 714 in 2004). Wounded dropped by a quarter for the U.S., from almost 8k in 2004 to under 6k in 2005. Meanwhile suicide bombers rose from 7 to 67, and IEDs rose from 5k to 10k. Car bombs also basically doubled from 400 to 800.
All that rising activity and U.S. deaths and casualties drop, while Iraqi deaths outnumber ours roughly 4 to one.
The biggest reason for our drop, though, is that attacks on U.S. troops succeed far less frequently. In 2004, such attacks created casualties about 25-30 percent of the time. In 2005 that percentage of casualty-producing attacks dropped to 10%.
Simply put, we’ve gotten smarter in our tactics, techniques and procedures, and the Iraqis are shouldering more of the fight.
Leaving Iraq is not an option and really won’t happen. What will happen is that our casualties will continue to fall and Iraqis will continue to assume more of the fighting. Eventually, the public will stop noticing our efforts in Iraq because casualties will be minimal, as more and more of our troops stay inside the wire.
We get smarter, and the enemy gets more desperate. And that’s how you wins wars, no matter what “generation” you label them.
Reader Comments