« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
Petraeus' Counting Methodology Unveiled (Well, Sort of)
Now we're getting somewhere. At the National Press Club this morning, Gen. Petraeus for the first time peeled back the curtain behind his questioned methodology for tabulating ethno-sectarian violence. Calling his methodology "pretty logical and rational," the general said he has a "three-page document" -- he read from it at his Press Club podium -- that refutes a senior intelligence official who told Karen DeYoung of The Washington Post that Multi-National Force--Iraq doesn't count front-of-the-head executions as sectarian incidents. "It's just not true," Petraeus said. So what is a sectarian murder?
"Civilians who show signs of being blindfolded, tortured or being shot anywhere, and so forth."
No word on how MNF-I tabulates civilian casualties. (Does it use Iraqi government data? Morgue data?) Also no word on why two of the larger U.S. intelligence agencies, with the largest analytic capability in the intelligence community, reportedly take issue with MNF-I's stats. So we'll be filing a Freedom of Information Act request for the methodology document today.
Comments (10)
FMArouet wrote on September 12, 2007 10:51 AM:So...Petraeus cherry-picks or even fabricates his own numbers, which he then massages with his very own, very special, methodology.
After he has filled out his own report card with his own numbers, he then sits before Congress to offer his own happy talk job evaluation.
Voila! He claims success in his mission! Surprise!
But he still cannot describe an endgame or offer a credible time frame.
M M wrote on September 12, 2007 11:07 AM:Seems pretty simple: why can't reporters or Congressional Dems ask for a copy of the methodology used (Petreus had three pages of it with him at the mic) and for MNF-I to declassify its data (if its all on the up and up there is no reason to classify it and at the very least the Dems deserve to see it).
Michael wrote on September 12, 2007 11:49 AM:Question. Isn't a person killed a casualty? It really doesn't matter how the person died, the person is still a casualty. This attempt by these criminals to cherry pick information to support a nonsensical failed policy in Iraq is disgusting. Oh the "sectarian" deaths are decreasing, while more and more innocent Iraqis die for "other" reasons. It's horrible. How do these people sleep at night? The Iraqis don't want us there anyway, for obvious reasons. Why don't the dems gets some guts and cut off funding NOW and stop these criminals?
paul wrote on September 12, 2007 11:51 AM:Does anyone want to take a bet that the snippet Petraeus read turns out to be misleading? (I'm still wondering, as a longtime nitpicker, what it means to "show signs" of being shot -- you'd think an entry or exit wound would be rather more than a sign.)
Thomas W. Rodd wrote on September 12, 2007 1:39 PM:All this numbers stuff reminds me very much of the McNamara/Westmoreland stuff in Vietnam, as so well described in Sheehan's "A Bright Shining Lie." The bean-counter approach to measuring success against an insurgency. Except the beans are precious human lives. Horrible, horrible, horrible.
Thomas W. Rodd wrote on September 12, 2007 1:40 PM:All this numbers stuff reminds me very much of the McNamara/Westmoreland stuff in Vietnam, as so well described in Sheehan's "A Bright Shining Lie." The bean-counter approach to measuring success against an insurgency. Except the beans are precious human lives. Horrible, horrible, horrible.
Rance wrote on September 12, 2007 1:51 PM:So unless they were bound and blindfolded, those killed by car bombs don't count.
Bilbo wrote on September 12, 2007 2:21 PM:Here's a guy, Petraeus, with a PhD, the guy who (as the Administration likes to remind us) literally "wrote the book" on counterinsurgency, a decorated career militarist and soldier, who says his methodology is "PRETTY logical and rational." Is that the best we can get from a purported expert in the field? Can he spell "credibility"?
senilebiker wrote on September 12, 2007 3:47 PM:How can anyone give any credence to anything these guys say. Two examples.
Petraeus or Crocker specifically mentioned 2 million Iraqia displaced out of the country, but the MNF-Iraq website states that there is ZERO net migration in Iraq. Has the surge brought 2million contractors into compensate.
Secondly, Petraeus stated that attacks, particularly car bombs are down. he subsequently stated when asked whether the Iranian interference was increasing, he stated that judging by the amount of equipment and IED;s that were coming in, then the Iranians were increasing their activities.
I guess they must be stocking them in a warehouse somewhere.
Liars all!
Carpl Lam wrote on September 12, 2007 9:44 PM:FACES OF THE FALLEN
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18338428//nPage/2
_____
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/9/1/164315/8536
CNN on Battle of Fallujah - The Anvil of God?
by hobo
Sat Sep 01, 2007
Here's what was said about the Battle of Fallujah on Dailykos at the time.
No civilian deaths in Fallujah
Did anyone see CNN's piece on the Battle of Fallujah last night?
It was called The Anvil of God. This is glaring propaganda and to borrow from Thomas Paine, an insult to God. There is no evidence that God had anything to do with.
It said that there was "no evidence" for the claims of civilian casualties. A more accurate statement would be that reports of civilian casualties were repressed, hidden, dismissed, ignored and denied by US authorities.