Collegiate Times

Why are we in Iraq? A 1967 novel by Norman Mailer asked the same question in its title regarding the Vietnam War. But do we have an answer?

In January of this year, against the wishes of the American people and the American Congress, the Bush administration chose to launch a 'surge' in United States troops raising our presence in Iraq to over 160,000 pairs of boots. The driving force behind the surge, in the words of the Bush administration, was to improve the security situation to the point at which Iraqi political reconciliation could take place at the national level.

Over the past few weeks, the surge has received increasing coverage in anticipation of Gen. Patraeus' progress report. The general consensus is that Petraeus will claim the surge has improve security, reduced civilian casualties, and allowed for unprecedented cooperation with former Sunni insurgents in the effort to rid Iraq of foreign fighters.

There are two questions to ask prior to this assessment. The first of course is concerned with the accuracy of the information and the context in which it is presented. The second question is a bit broader. Does any of this matter?

Regarding the first question, we are invariably faced with claims whose accuracy is difficult to assess. Security is not the most tangible notion, and the general's report will no doubt rely on statistical claims that will be called into question by some. Civilian casualties, which are particularly challenging to ascertain, will also form a basis of the report.

The reports by Reuters, Iraq Body Count, Iraq Coalition Casualty Count and others vary to different degrees and inevitably fail to account for some measure of civilian deaths. In so far as they accurately reflect monthly trends, they are not encouraging.

According to the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, whose information is readily available at icasualties.org, the monthly civilian casualties have been significantly higher in 2007, during the surge, than in 2006. In 2006, five months recorded civilian fatalities greater than 1,500. In 2007, seven out of the eight months so far have met the same barrier. The trend of high civilian fatalities that began in August 2006 has continued pretty steadily over the past year. The reader can further explore the statistics on this and other sites, but it goes to challenge the notion that we have made measurable progress in reducing the number of civilian fatalities.

That being said, the Washington consensus seems to be that the effects of the surge have been positive and that a withdrawal remains out of the picture. The American public, on the other hand, has not moved with the Washington tide.

According to the results of a recent poll by The Washington Post, reported on Sept. 9, 58 percent of Americans-a new high-favor a troop reduction. Fifty-five percent support "legislation that would set a deadline of next spring for the withdrawal of American combat forces." Those who think the U.S. is losing the war has dropped under 50 percent, but more than 60 percent still believe the war is not worth fighting.

Continue Reading: 12 Next »