Post #100
I guess for some people, 100 posts isn't much. But since I started this blog about 5 months ago, it is a milestone for me.
I wanted to look at the beginning of the blog, and reflect a bit about why the hell I'm doing this after all. I noticed that my first post (other than an introduction note) was on Iraq. The heart of the argument I was making at the time was...
I think that history is playing out pretty well for me. A no brainer, I think, but an opinion you don't hear much.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I am trying to show things as they are, and not how I want them to be. I save my strong opinions (usually) for the comment boxes.
I'm not trying to say that I am non-baised. Certainly the subject matter I choose to report on makes my bais clear if I don't make it clear enough in the posts. I think that the facts end up supporting my positions. I don't need to push it, but sometimes I do anyway. Hey, I'm only human, and I don't have an editor hanging over my head.
Anyway, thank you to everyone who reads this blog, and especially those who take the time to leave comments. You have all helped me understand the world better. If I have done the same for anyone, on even the most subtle level, then this has all been worth it.
Happy blogging everyone!
Praguetwin
I wanted to look at the beginning of the blog, and reflect a bit about why the hell I'm doing this after all. I noticed that my first post (other than an introduction note) was on Iraq. The heart of the argument I was making at the time was...
According to icasualties.org, the average number of coalition casualties per day since the March 2003 invation is 2.34 per day. It fluctuates month to month and period to period, but interestingly enough, as we get further and further into this war, the average remains virtually unchanged and it seems to be getting more and more consistent. Whereas early on we had months with over 4 per day and as little as .79 per day in February 2004, 2005 has seen a much more consistent loss of coalition life. But if you throw out the first few months of "major combat operations" you will see a pretty consistent pattern. So the next time you hear someone on the left saying things are getting worse, or someone on the right saying things are getting better, just remember this: things are essentially unchanged. Unchanged as well are the number of insurgent attacks.
I think that history is playing out pretty well for me. A no brainer, I think, but an opinion you don't hear much.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that I am trying to show things as they are, and not how I want them to be. I save my strong opinions (usually) for the comment boxes.
I'm not trying to say that I am non-baised. Certainly the subject matter I choose to report on makes my bais clear if I don't make it clear enough in the posts. I think that the facts end up supporting my positions. I don't need to push it, but sometimes I do anyway. Hey, I'm only human, and I don't have an editor hanging over my head.
Anyway, thank you to everyone who reads this blog, and especially those who take the time to leave comments. You have all helped me understand the world better. If I have done the same for anyone, on even the most subtle level, then this has all been worth it.
Happy blogging everyone!
Praguetwin
posted by Praguetwin at
8:36 PM
5 Comments:
Congratulations PT. They do add up alarmingly quickly.
By
Cartledge, at 9:52 PM
Good job man, thanks for the forum. I seldom see eye to eye with people who post here, but I think we all quest for the truth.
As to your views on Iraq, if your only yardstick of success or failure comes in the form of a body count, you have a lot in common the U.S. Government during the Vietnam War.
By
Anonymous, at 12:30 AM
Thanks Cartledge,
Arch, is that supposed to be some sort of insult? One major difference: My body count is not inflated. Why dont you go back and read that post in its entirety.
By
Praguetwin, at 9:33 AM
No insult intended, sorry, its just that in my mind - inflated or not - body count is a bad yard stick and clearly you use body count to conclude that things are unchanged. And yes, I did read the post in its entirety.
As an aside, in previous discussions we have had, you relied on an inflated body count of civilian dead - a body count that was arrived at by using "loose math". To your credit you have reduced that number to a more likely estimate.
By
Anonymous, at 3:39 PM
Arch,
Also note that in the quote in this post is a mention of insurgent attacks.
I think a fair measure of an insurgency is the number of attacks they can carry out.
Similarly, a good measure of sectarian violence is the number of bound and executed bodies they haul in to the morgue each morning.
And in THAT regard, maybe things are indeed changing.....for the worse.
I admit my earlier mistake with the 100,000 number. What did we agree on? Minimum of 35,000?
By
Praguetwin, at 10:37 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home