War by the numbers

U.S. News & World Report ^ | 18 July 2005 (Week of) | Julian E. Barnes

[Racehorse]

The body count has returned. . . .

[. . .]

. . . Although there is no independent way to gauge the body count, the numbers in Iraq and Afghanistan do not seem to be consciously inflated . . .

. . . There may be 47 bodies spread out on the streets of Karabilah, but who are they? . . . it is impossible to know for sure who was an insurgent, who was a member of a local militia, who was a criminal smuggler, and who was an innocent bystander. . . . since the military knows neither how many insurgents there are in Iraq and Afghanistan nor how many foreign fighters are being recruited to the cause every day, there is no way of telling the military significance of any reported number . . .

[. . .]

. . . Lt. Gen. John Vines, who oversees military operations in Iraq, says as long as ordinary Iraqis can be recruited for $150 to lay a roadside bomb, it does no good to count how many insurgents have been killed. . . . the important numbers are those showing how many Iraqi troops have been trained and equipped. . . .

. . . why are body counts creeping back into military press releases? . . . body counts allow the public to gauge the size and presumed effectiveness of individual military operations . . . commanders are intent on showing progress. . . . Many soldiers and marines are looking for signs that their sacrifice has not been fruitless, that they have been accomplishing something during their time in Iraq. "For marines on the ground who have watched their buddies die," Crane notes, "it means something to them to inflict damage on the enemy."