Comments on: The Iraq War: When Bad Things Happen to Good Statistics

By: Josh Carroll

Josh Carroll — Fri, 20 Apr 2007 21:28:31 +0000

This makes sense as bad as it is to say. More American soldiers died than Iraqi soldiers because Americans walk around in uniform. Iraqis walk around in civilian clothes most times and when they fear their lives or feel that they are in danger, they drop their weapons and melt into the civilian population, making it nearly impossible for U.S. soldiers to find them. Plus they use IEDs which they just plant then run and blow from a safe distance. Oour soldiers then have no enemy to engage. Also, due to the Geneva Convention, we can not shoot unarmed civilians/ peoples. So, if you look at it this way, it makes some sense.

By: Kevin H

Kevin H — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 22:40:50 +0000

Ahh, is it that just a disproportionate ammount of deaths happen on car rides, which is why we hear about it more? Or do they make more mounted patrols than foot patrols? And why not do ALL foot patrols?

Also, random side note about the picture… Is the fact that the woman in the picture is wielding a weapon a good sign of women’s lib in Iraq? (half kidding)

By: Eric

Eric — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 21:29:01 +0000

They do foot patrols. They just don’t only do foot patrols.

By: Shaun

Shaun — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 19:02:52 +0000

Because everyone knows that Americans would rather ride than walk.

By: Kevin H

Kevin H — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 18:54:40 +0000

“The Iraqi army units I embedded with werenâ€™t on the roads much in vehicles, they mainly were doing foot patrols. Which are harder to target with IEDs, because dismounted soldiers can more easily ID the IED indicators and can hunt down the trigger man”

Then why aren’t American soldiers doing more foot patrols?

By: Shaun Mullen

Shaun Mullen — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 17:36:20 +0000

Davebo:

There is no link. I discussed the apparent disconnect between the number of Iraqi and U.S. military deaths with Bill and others more in the know than I. This is a concept called “reporting” that is all too regretably absent in the opinion-rich blogosphere.

I like to think of statistics as snapshots in time. People need to get beyond them if they want a fuller and more nuanced picture.

By: Davebo

Davebo — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:26:39 +0000

I disagree with Bill that casualty numbers are a poor metric. They are but one metric that should be used, but they are certainly a valid metric. I didn’t see a link to Bill’s post, but I’m curious as to whether he offers alternative metrics to be used in place of US casualties.