Body counts?

Early in our invasion of Iraq, a Pentagon official announced, "We don't do body counts," a reference to the practice during the Vietnam War, where Army officers would report the number of dead enemy soldiers (often an inflated, imaginary figure) as the measure of success of a battle. And indeed, until recently, no such figures have been announced for US operations in Iraq, relating to deaths of either armed resistance or unarmed civilians.
With yesterday's battle, however, we now have a tally, 54, revised upward from 46 .


This bodes poorly for the Iraqis on two counts: First, if body counts now become a practice, any Iraqi in the vicinity of an attack becomes a target, to induce headlines which read, "Two US soldiers die in attack, fifteen Iraqis killed." This, it might be reasoned by the Pentagon, will make more palatable our losses. Second, these escalated attacks against Iraqis may be a means by which the Army seeks to discourage insurgents, by wreaking such havoc on the nearby civilians that the latter turn on the insurgents out of fear of American reprisal. This is another tactic fromt the Vietnam era.

It didn't work then, and it won't work now, but look out for such tactics and announcements in upcoming dispatches from the front. If they occurred to me, they have surely occurred to Rumsfeld.