The number of U.S. combat deaths in Iraq this month is headed toward the lowest monthly level since March 2006, reflecting a turnaround in U.S. efforts to establish security and defeat insurgents.And what about the people of Iraq, you ask.
With one day left in November, 26 U.S. troops and a civilian Pentagon employee have died in combat. Nine more service members died in non-combat-related incidents.
The November toll could mark the sixth consecutive month of declines in American deaths. It follows a downward trend in overall violence in Iraq.
At the same time, U.S. troops have established better security for Iraqis, making siding with insurgents a less attractive option, Wood said.
Of the 27 U.S personnel killed in combat this month, 24 were killed by roadside bombs, or improvised explosive devices. Only three were killed by gunfire.
The high proportion of IED deaths stems from insurgents being less willing to shoot at U.S. troops. It's safer to plant a bomb, Wood said.
Civilian deaths in Iraq also have fallen, to under 1,000 in October from about 3,000 in December 2006, according to a U.S. military database.And for those wont to question, as they always will, "Well, yes, but who's doing the reporting? How do we know we are being told the truth?", I posit this.
If you choose to believe, not just the mainstream media when it reports about all the horrible things happening in Iraq on a daily basis ... the atrocious number of troops and civilians killed, the increase in insurgency and IEDs and the terrible things those American soldiers do ... but also the more obviously partisan sources, well, why wouldn't you believe one of the same (more credible) sources if they actually reported some good news for once?
Can't have it both ways now, can we?
H/T to Neptunus Lex for the link