Don't Believe the Hype

Despite the initial success of "US and Iraqi troops retaking Samarra, I don't think celebrations are truly in order there. As Juan Cole noted last Friday, attacking guerillas in Samarra also means assaulting the city. Unfortunately, most residents are civilians, not combatants, and those who couldn't flee were subject to the random violence that defines "the fog of war."

On the other hand, the US finally DID apply overwhelming numbers--a combined force of 5,000 US and Iraqi soldiers participated in the attack against several hundred insurgents (Cole describes them as mostly local youth gangs, although some have lately taken to wearing the colors of Monotheism and Holy War). But we are still chronically short of boots on the ground, and the fact that a few hundred guerillas could even take Samarra in the first place is indicative of the problems the US still faces.

The US claims 125 enemy were killed in the assault, but this number appears to include at least some noncombatant civilians. Also, many guerrillas simply disappeared--I think there's little doubt they've either gone elsewhere to strike at us, or will wait us out.

The 2,000 Iraqis participating in the attack appear to be the largest contingent of local forces used to date. The Times article says little about what they actually did, though.

I'm not yet ready to buy into the hype surrounding the new Iraqi army for a lot of reasons. To begin, you have the obvious lies, like the ones Bush told at Thursday's debate. TalkingPointsMemo pokes a monster-truck sized hole in the claim that 100,000 Iraqi troops have been trained, while William S. Lind offers some perspective on the nature of what amounts to a contingent of mercenaries.

Which is why it will be interesting to watch as the Iraqi forces are given control of Samarra.