Replies

Let's do the math here. Out of 148,000 troops we have 8 killed in a week. At the height of Vietnam we had nearly 4 times the number of troops and the casualty rate was 3-4 times greater than the 30 KIA/week that we'd get if we extrapolate the present proportion of losses in Iraq. But the numbers ultimately don't matter as much as the public perception, and it's not solely the media's fault: Big kill ratios certainly didn't translate into victory in Korea or Vietnam.

It also matters immensely that we seize absolute control of all Iraq, leaving no sizeable havens for hostile forces. Aside from getting Saddam and his sons (assuming they're still out there), that'll be the true measure of progress, not body counts. If substantial pockets of territory remain open for the enemy to operate within, chances are the killing of our soldiers will drag on and on.

Good post, I agree on all points. The media is key, though. They won't change, but we can bypass them and get the info out to the people. We did in Florida in 2000 and 2002. Bloggers, radio and FR make a difference...still, if we had an Ernie Pyle w/ his own radio show - the press couldn't create the perception that we're suffering major losses, and anyone hyping Saddam propaganda would have one voice shaming 'em into playing, say, pictures of the mass-graves, or an interview with a General everytime Saddam's loyalists "find" a new tape, play the same old damnable games inciting fear in the Iraqi population.