No troops reported killed for the last couple of days

Good for the troops ... or just not being reported .... have hostilities died down .... how many wounded (hopefully none) ....
Is it a lull or are things getting better?

If you believe the official Pentagon press releases, that is. It always comes out to an average of one dead per day. We go a few days with no attacks, and then a copter gets shot down and 9 or 10 are killed. It all comes out the same.

minimizing possibilities of attack and ambush. Not as many patrols. Not as many passes into the towns. Only necessary traffic. A smart strategy.

when they don't send out patrols, it makes it easier for the insurgents to plan their next attack. Recon and intelligence gathering are much easier with nobody looking over your shoulder.

Go out and get shot at, or stay in and wait for an attack.

Bring them home.

CNN gleefully reported it as a sign democracy is taking hold in Iraq. Now don't get me wrong - I don't want our soldiers to die. BUT - a couple of days without casualties does not mean everything's hunky dory in Iraq.

It was right before the bloodiest month of the war. I'd hope to see zero casualties from this point out. But the only way I see that happening is by getting our troops home.

It is already page 4 and 5 of the newspaper. War is not as popular as bu$h would like so they will downplay it as much as possible.

News Reports Are Still Saying 496 As Of Last Night.

WTF?

certainly confirms they are fudging the numbers, not that I doubted it.

I agree with Kentuck I think they are lying low , the casualty count is near a watermark of 500, maybe we've already passed it who the fuck knows.

Some of the media whores on CNN yesterday were trying to make out that the recent massive (and largely peaceful) demonstrations by Shiites for immediate direct elections in opposition to the CPA/US plan for elections by appointed caucuses were a positive sign of a blossoming democracy taking hold in Iraq. However they really didn't delve too deeply into what was going to happen if the US ignored the Shiite demands.

We know that the US can't allow for a one man, one vote situation because the Shiites would likely end up in control. So now it looks like we're reaching a point of an irresistible force meeting up with an immovable object. We'll get to see which cracks first. And given the history of Iraq, I wouldn't count on it being the Iraqi Shiites. If the US does attempt to keep a lid on the situation, it will only be by means of a massive and expensive military operation which I very much doubt will be sustainable in the long term.

Here is an interesting piece on the situation by the libertarian columnist Justin Raimondo from antiwar.com.

As they gathered in the southern city of Basra, the cry went up from the crowd of tens of thousands:

"No, no to America! Yes, yes to al-Sistani!"

Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani, the leader of Iraq's Shi'ites, isn't happy about the Coalition Provisional Authority plan to hold provincial "caucuses" of their handpicked stooges, who would then organize a government. Last summer the Ayatollah, spiritual leader of Iraq's 60-70% majority Shi'ites, issued a fatwa calling for direct, democratic elections to a constituent assembly, torpedoing an American scheme to write a Constitution first. Imperial proconsul Paul Bremer then came up with his caucus plan, which is now effectively blocked by the Ayatollah's veto.

Undeterred by prudence, Bremer is now launching a campaign to get Sistani to change his mind, mobilizing his amen corner in the Iraqi Governing Council and even pushing Kofi Annan to lobby for the caucus plan. Annan has cited numerous "experts," who all claim that a census couldn't possibly be taken in time, the security situation is too tenuous, and giving half a dozen other reasons why the "liberation" of Iraq just can't mean one person, one vote.

So let's see if I get this straight: the U.S., which went to war to export "democracy" to Iraq (and the entire Middle East), in defiance of the UN, is telling the Iraqis that they aren't ready for self-government – and is now seeking the UN Secretary General's imprimatur for what amounts to a policy of brazen imperialism. Instead of elections, a series of elite "caucus" meetings will be held, in which the neocons, er, um, I mean, the Americans, handpick the voters – and predetermine the results.

http://antiwar.com/justin/index.php?articleid=1708

the word "get the hell out NOW!

cheney will not let the US leave Iraq until the corporate profits have been reaped. So hello Holy War to oust the infidel Americans! This was ALL predicted to happen way before the illegal invasion. Wake the hell up america and demand our Troops Come Home!

The US is offering 10K to sign on for another 2-3 years with literally NO takers. Who the hell could blame any of them? Of course you will be doing the time in Iraq....

David

http://dailywarnews.blogspot.com/

I check in here daily....seems all is not well...just not reported..check it out