General math

Vol. 2 No. 74 Oct. 26, 2007
The Bogus Economist
General Math


Math is not my favorite topic, especially since I learned that in base two, I am 101101 years old. Considering the barrage of debate over our presence in Iraq, however, I feel it's time to smother my natural disinclination toward math and do the proper economic thing, i.e. subject the Iraq debate to the intense scrutiny of mathematical models and analysis. Or, as one of my former friends said to me, “Since you need analysis, why not the war?”

The catalyst for this momentous decision on my part came about as retired General Ricardo Sanchez fired some good-sized mortar shells at the media (which I feel needs lots more of them), his lack of definite orders while he was in charge of Abu Graib prison and the ham-handed incompetence of the Administration in understanding very well what they wanted to do, but not having a snowball's idea in Hell of how to do it. He describes Iraq as “A nightmare with no end in sight.” Not bad from a former commander of coalition forces in the whole country.

It is clear, however, General Sanchez feels it would be a calamity to withdraw troops from Iraq since this would result in “chaos,” a concept this column has dealt with before. The concept of “winning” the war has also been written about. The picture General Sanchez paints is grim and he's not the only painter in town. Fundamentally, the argument boils down to a relatively simple problem: Is what we're doing in Iraq reducing the number of terrorists and thus increasing our safety? Can we “win?” Enter the math.

The papers recently have recounted a large number of raids by the U.S. Army on suspected Al Qaida members in various towns and villages in Iraq. Here's one from MSN: “U.S. troops backed by attack aircraft killed 19 suspected insurgents and 15 civilians, including nine children, in an operation Thursday targeting al-Qaida in Iraq leaders northwest of Baghdad, the military said. An initial airstrike struck a 'time-sensitive target,' killing four insurgents in the Lake Tharthar area after intelligence reports indicated senior members of al-Qaida in Iraq were meeting there, according to a statement...Subsequent airstrikes were called in. Ground forces secured the area and determined '15 terrorists, six women and nine children were killed,' a statement said. Two suspects, one woman and three children also were wounded and one suspected insurgent was detained, it added.”

O.K., let's turn on the math machine. First, let's assume all nineteen of the “suspected insurgents” were actually Al Qaida members, although the official statement mentioned only four. Assume our intelligence was correct, however, and there were really nineteen. That's (-19) in mathspeak. Another two suspects were wounded, so let's assume they're also out of action. That makes (-21). Another was detained (-22).

Now let's go over to the other side. We killed fifteen civilians, including nine kids. It didn't say in the report whether some of the adults were the parents of any of the children. There were also three children and another woman injured, The total non-insurgents, then, is (+19). So, on the surface, we seems to have disabled a total of three more bad guys than good guys (-3).

Here's where the math starts to tell a story. The average Iraqi family is numerous, thanks to a system of kinship where sometimes several generations live under the same roof. In some villages, kinship extends to virtually every inhabitant. Using an arbitrary number, it's pretty safe to say fifteen dead civilians represents up to a few hundred other “relatives” who escaped killing.

It's also safe to say the kin of the dead civilians were not pleased to find their sisters, mothers, brothers, fathers, uncles or significant others mistakenly dispatched during an air strike. Nor would they be mollified when told it was a shame, but worth it because nineteen suspected terrorists were also killed.

It's wise to bear in mind here the Arab culture is big on revenge. It's a matter of family honor to even scores, especially when an offense involves lots of members of the family. Since it's almost impossible to find out which individuals actually dropped the bombs during the air strike, it's much easier to swear revenge at the country whose insignia decorated the aircrafts' wings.

Totaling up, this means the air strikes in question produced a net gain of roughly two hundred or so people who would love to see the Great Satan (that's us, folks) get his come-uppance. Call it (-200). Adding the noneteen who might have been members of Al Qaida, the two wounded and the one detained, we're left with roughly 222 suspected terrorists or terrorist wannabees, nineteen of them dead. It's all so clear. We get nineteen – maybe – and they get two hundred three.

Continuing with the math, let's multiply this figure by the number of our air strikes and the recently reported trigger-happiness of the hired cowboys in our private security armies and you might conclude General Sanchez is guilty of understatement when he calls Iraq a “nightmare.” Let's be charitable and say it doesn't exactly add up to winning the hearts and minds of Iraqis. It didn't win General Sanchez'.

It sure doesn't win mine.

-30

The Bogus Economist © 2007