‘Index of Civil Conflict’ slides towards ‘chaos’

It’s not quite “last throes,” but Rumsfeld’s Pentagon wants the public to believe that tremendous progress is underway in Iraq. When the Defense Secretary isn’t telling those with questions about the war to “back off,” he’s telling them that conditions in Iraq, including security, are “improving.”

Behind closed doors, U.S. Central Command knows better.

A classified briefing prepared two weeks ago by the United States Central Command portrays Iraq as edging toward chaos, in a chart that the military is using as a barometer of civil conflict.
chaos
A one-page slide shown at the Oct. 18 briefing provides a rare glimpse into how the military command that oversees the war is trying to track its trajectory, particularly in terms of sectarian fighting.

The slide includes a color-coded bar chart that is used to illustrate an “Index of Civil Conflict.” It shows a sharp escalation in sectarian violence since the bombing of a Shiite shrine in Samarra in February, and tracks a further worsening this month despite a concerted American push to tamp down the violence in Baghdad.

In fashioning the index, the military is weighing factors like the ineffectual Iraqi police and the dwindling influence of moderate religious and political figures, rather than more traditional military measures such as the enemy’s fighting strength and the control of territory.

The image is pretty self-explanatory, but it’s pretty clear we’re not moving towards the green part (“peace”); we’re already in the red part (“chaos”).

An intelligence summary at the bottom of the slide, obtained by the NYT, reads “urban areas experiencing ‘ethnic cleansing’ campaigns to consolidate control” and “violence at all-time high, spreading geographically.” According to a Central Command official, the index on civil strife has been a staple of internal command briefings for most of this year.

Have Bush and Rumsfeld seen this slide? Of course they have.

Indeed, right around the time the president saw this very-easy-to-understand image, he began to hem and haw about whether he’d ever uttered the words “stay the course.”

Look, we’ve reached a point in which even Bush should be able to understand the situation. His National Intelligence Estimate says that Iraq has helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the overall terrorist threat has grown. His Central Command officials show easy-to-read arrows moving towards the “bad” part of a chart measuring peace vs. chaos.

Maybe now’s a good time for Dick Cheney to remind us that conditions in Iraq are going “remarkably well“?

I suppose, if you’re a conservative today, the problem isn’t the disaster in Iraq, it’s the chart measuring the disaster in Iraq. Matt Yglesias noted, for example, how the National Review considers the landscape.

[I]n yesterday’s editorial making the case for the GOP, National Review argued it was vital to keep the Democrats out of power, because only a Republican majority can protect the American public from accurate information about Iraq: “their victory would undoubtedly strengthen the forces who want to declare Iraq a defeat and come home. Partisan oversight hearings will politicize every military miscalculation, every dime misspent, and every abuse by our allies (real or imagined). The effect will be to sap what public support remains for seeing the job done in Iraq. The doomsday clock on our commitment in Iraq will have lurched a few minutes closer to midnight.”

Vote GOP: We’ll maintain a cocoon of denial!

Given the nonsense we’re hearing from Republicans on both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue, it’s going to have to be a very big cocoon.

we’ve reached a point in which even Bush should be able to understand the situation

Perfect.

THIS is the best way to talk about Iraq. It rolls Bush’s incompetence, his lies, and the horror of the actual situation into one nice neat soundbite that Joe American can take in and mull over.

  • you’d think with a pretty color graph and all to go with its shocking substance this would knock Kerry from the top slot at CNN.com and MSNBC.com. although if you did think that, you’d think wrong.

  • Initiate ShrubCo Response-o-Tron … … … ShrubCo Response-o-Tron initiated … … …

    This is clearly a politically motivated leak by terrorists enablers within the Pentagon. … … … No, I haven’t seen this chart … … … You have to wonder why stuff like this is coming out so close to the election … … … Democracy is not easy … … … Chaos is just thefinal throes of theinsurgency … … …The !raqi pepleo R reslient … ! … ! {Logic Error} … … … If we doughnut fight them there we will flight them in our streaks !!! !!! !!! Error. Error. Fatal Logic Error.

    !Response-o-Tron session terminated. Please contact your Haliburton Technician for assistance!

  • President Bush has understood the situation for a long time. He gets briefings, he gets bad news.

    A fundamental difference between Republicans and Democrats — or rather, the people in power and the people who WANT to be in power — is that Repubs believe that a brave face and an optimistic outlook are critical to victory. Dems believe that victory in Iraq is impossible, but their own victory on 11/7 is likely if they bring more Americans to that conclusion.

    The Dems are correct. We cannot win in Iraq. Victory has gotten away from us.

  • “Repubs believe that a brave face and an optimistic outlook are critical to victory.” – seamus

    Pity they didn’t actually try a plan that might work from the start. They totally had a choice to go to war with Saddam, but they acted like a choice did not exist.

    In short, they acted like a pregnant teenage girl who wants to stay on the cheerleading squad.

  • It’s looking more and more like what we’ll see in the not too distant future could be choppers evacuating the Green Zone as it’s surrounded by howling mobs, just like Saigon at the end of the Vietnam debacle.

    Of course, even then good old “Bagdad Donnie” Rumsfeld will insist that things are fine and we’re making good progress in Iraq.

  • hmmm, interesting point Curmudgeon, and one rarely brought up. I agree that the anger and resentment could boil over to the point where mobs attack the greenzone, but how do you really think we’d react? Would we start gunning down civilians, or would we up and leave? I honestly am scared of the former, because we are so taken with the idea of permanent bases there, but I suppose we could abandon them and just set up a cordon around the oil fields with whatever trooops necessary. I mean, oil WAS and still is priority one, so lets not fool ourselves. But I think permanent bases were a close second.

    Thoughts?

  • It looks like something from Civ4. Maybe what we’re seeing is the intervening period of anarchy that always comes from swapping governmental schemes. We went from Dictatorship to Democracy, of course there’s a litle period of instabilit in between. But just think of all those lovely shields our fields will soon be producing. And how much money we can divert to happiness.

  • “So, red is good, right?”

    “No, Mr. President.”

    “Why not? I like red.”

    “Red means the situation is getting worse, sir.”

    “Well, we say here that a red state is on our side, so why can’t we use that for Iraq?”

    “Whatever you want, Mr. President.”

    “What time is it?”

    “5 o’clock, sir”

    “Sweet!! Time for Spongebob!”

  • Oops, I messed up the Powerpoint Captions. Reverse them and you’ll have the official sanctioned slide. Red is in fact good. Very Good. Those Greens and Blues on the other hand are bad news. Blue is so bad we can’t even show it to you.

    Orange is starting to bug the crap out of me too for some reason.

  • What the White House and Pentagon won’t tell you is that they view increasing chaos as an improvement, rather than decreasing chaos. These guys are all PNACers, we know their agenda already, they laid it out in the open over a decade ago when they said attacking Iraq was on top of it. They want the chaos to continue. 1) It’s a gift to their radical evangelical base who believe that more violence and chaos in the middle east is a good thing because it brings Armageddon (and the rapture) that much closer. 2) It’s a perpetual war, which gives Bush an excuse to destroy the Constitution more and more. That man (or at least Rove and Cheney) is going to find a way to remain in office after 2009 when any normal respecter of the Constitution would step down.

  • The new chart and the reality it reflects is really sad. It means more American and Iraqi deaths and the complete collapse of Iraq (leading to another Saddam).

    But George Bush — like LBJ before him — isn’t going to admit the truth. If I were president, I’m not sure I’d admit it either. (Think about the ramifications of doing so.) But the selfish little fuckwit has buried us in Iraq, with no good options. The humiliation of the United States as a superpower may hasten the rise of China and India, and completely scramble the Mideast. I’m not sure if we CAN leave Iraq for a long, long time.

    Regarding the Green Zone, Mark Shields said on the Newshour last week that he had a very reliable source who said the new Iraq strategy will be pulling American troops out of Baghdad, leaving it to Iraqi security. That may not be a bad idea, but it will be read as a defeat. It may be a setup for an abrupt withdrawal, allowing Bush to claim victory and blame Iraqis for the subsequent civil war and bloodbath.

  • Actually, the imagined conversation with George would be predicated on red and orange being good colors, because every time Karl ‘n’ Dick raise the fictional Terra Lert to those colors, the GOP wins.

    Does anyone else think that the military’s incompetence at building coherent, readable .ppt slides explains a lot about its inability to think strategically? Not only is the slide full-to-burstin’ with too much information, and presented in a haphazard manner, but there are two simultaneous yet incompatible color-coding schemes going on: on the sliding scale, red = bad and green = good; while on the frequency table, red = rare while green = common.

    Oh, shit — now I’m going to have to apologize for calling our Heroes in Uniform “stupid,” aren’t I?

  • Re: #7 – G2000, if Iraq descended into true chaos, my guess is that the military would be forced to go into full defensive mode to protect lives within the protected area. There would no doubt be casualties on both sides but our people would try to keep it limited both to minimize outside mass attacks and to conserve ammo until the evacuation was completed.

    Same with the bases outside of Bagdad. No base, even a superbase, can withstand a full national uprising forever. The death toll among the Iraqis would be enormous but sooner or later our guys would have to leave. That’s the tactical situation our Bonehead-In-Chief has put us in when things finally collapse. Thanks a lot, Mr. President. 🙁

    Re: #9 – 2Manchu, ROFLMAO!!! 🙂

  • Guess they’ll have to ratchet up the Homeland Security color coded index to hide the Iraqi color coded chaos index. Besides, we’re nearing an election … isn’t it time for a good old scare on the American electrorate anyway?

  • The article seems to lament “the dwindling influence of moderate religious and political figures.” Could they be talking about Sistani, who’s probably been one of the most frequently mentioned “moderate clerics?” Aside from that being an oxymoron among the 72 virgins set, Sistani is the guy who said not only that gay people should all be killed, but that they should be “killed in the worst way possible.” Hmm, I wonder what that would consist of among his crowd? Not lethal injection, I bet.

  • Comments are closed.