Confiscated weapons pile up in Iraq

[CommunityEditor]

Coalition forces have uncovered more insurgent weapons caches in the first six months of this year than the entire previous year, Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Monday.

The record number of seizures is due largely to a new U.S. strategy that has moved U.S. forces off bases and into neighborhoods, generating more tips from civilians. Offensives have also disrupted insurgent sanctuaries, Petraeus said.

Uncovering weapons caches is one of several signs of recent military progress, Petraeus said. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan Crocker will travel to Washington in September to give an assessment of the new strategy in Iraq, which is backed by an additional 30,000 U.S. troops.

Uncovering the caches, which can include everything from rockets and surface-to-air missiles to assault weapons and components for roadside bombs, gets weapons out of the hands of insurgents.

It’s also a sign of how prevalent weapons and ammunition are in Iraq. The numbers of arms caches uncovered so far this year is 3,698, up from 2,726 in all of last year, according to the military command in Iraq.

Petraeus will likely highlight progress on reconciliation at the local level when he comes to Washington. A growing movement of mainly Sunni groups is fed up with violence and a strict interpretation of Islam, and have turned on al-Qaida, he said.

The U.S. military is not arming the groups but is providing support in other ways, including paying salaries for some, Petraeus said. The goal is for the groups to eventually become part of Iraq’s security forces.

“I think there is a mind-set shift among Sunni Arabs,” Petraeus said.

Petraeus could include recommendations on troop levels as part of his assessment.

If no action is taken, the additional forces would remain until next spring.

“We all know the surge is going to end,” Petraeus said.

The question is whether reductions will be made before then.

The report in September will likely be an interim assessment and not a final report on whether the new strategy has failed or succeeded. The last of the additional forces arrived in Iraq in June.

“That’s not a whole lot of time to implement and assess,” said Col. Timothy Reese, director of the Army’s Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. “It won’t be obviously a failure, and it won’t be obviously a success.”


Full article: http://www.militarytimes.com/news/20...caches_070731/

[The Universal Curmudgeon_guest]

Originally Posted by CommunityEditor

Coalition forces have uncovered more insurgent weapons caches in the first six months of this year than the entire previous year, Army Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. commander in Iraq, said Monday.

Just being cynical here, but if the percentage of available weapons that was siezed had remained constant and the absolute number of available weapons had gone up then coalition forces would have "uncovered more insurgent weapons caches in the first six months of this year than the entire previous year" as well.

Heck, if the percentage had dropped by 25 percentage points and the number of available weapons had doubled then coalition forces would have "uncovered more insurgent weapons caches in the first six months of this year than the entire previous year" as well.

What really matters is if the number of available weapons that AREN'T being siezed is declining.

Does "General Dave" have any answer to that question?

For those who don't understand why that question is important, they can try working out the answer to the following (somewhat simplified) example:

(INSTRUCTIONS - Use the facts in Para [1] and the examples in Paras [2] and [3] to fill in the blanks in Para [4] and then answer the "True or False" question in Para [5])

[1] Your forces are absolutely guaranteed to kill 20 of the enemy for every 1 of your soldiers that the enemy kills.

[2] An enemy force of 100 attacks 100 of your soldiers. This results in 100 dead enemy fighters and 5 of your soldiers dead. - This is known as a "victory" for your side and a "defeat" for the enemy.

[3] An enemy force of 1,000 attacks 100 of your soldiers. This results in 1,000 dead enemy fighters and 10 of your soldiers dead. - This is known as a "tough victory" for your side and a "crushing defeat" for the enemy.

[4] An enemy force of 10,000 attacks 100 of your soldiers. This results in 2,000 dead enemy fighters and _____ of your soldiers dead. This is known as a "_____" for your side and a "_____" for the enemy.

[5] The press release concerning Para [4] is "factually correct" if it states "Our forces are killing the enemy at a rate that is 20 times as high as it was when (Para [2] happened). ___ TRUE ___ FALSE