This is an interesting read. Brings a unique angle to the debate. However, his analysis is problematic. The deaths caused by the conflict in Iraq aren't simply 'smoke and mirrors', and the political crisis there is unlikely to go away if Al Qaeda stopped their media war.

It’s the data which are the smoke and mirrors in this article. Originally the media were unanimous in their overwhelming support of the administration's excursion into Iraq. Interestingly, pieces like this containing such overly affirmatory statements such as: “capable of winning the war on the ground,” “in the flush of battlefield success,” “must develop the media corps that can win the war on the airwaves,” and the corker: “the military’s longstanding Public Affairs policy of media neutrality” seem to proliferate proportionality to the number of Republican defectors who were such omnipotent supporters of the Iraq war.

While the media data seems to be decently sourced, the claims of success don't seem to be sourced at all. And why is it news that terrorists fight media wars?

Excellent mathematical analysis of how Al Qaeda wins the battles that count most, the ones without blood that take place in the living rooms and break rooms.

Several reviewers seem to miss the point in this very good story. It is not about 'political crisis' or 'smoke and mirrors'. That kind of redirection by reviewers is dishonest. This is news because it points out with good data that the real war is indeed in the living rooms of America. That fact is constantly overlooked by those willing to see only our mistakes and willing to believe that if we just came home, all would be well. All will not be well folks if we just fold our tents. "were our country to suffer that level...'Please do not seek moral equivalence with those who target you first. Bottom line, this is an important and well sourced story.

Al Queda is targeting the US Congress thru a policy of bombing and atrocities that win them sympathetic press coverage in the US, even though it tarnishes their cause among the Iraqis who are on the receiving end. Al Queda is willing to sacrifice local Iraqi support if it gets the US Army out of Iraq.

My first reaction was simply to rate this story as "silly." But that does not begin to get to the heart of what is wrong with this article. No amount of mathematical formula- bending will change the fact that this is the same old, same old narrative: the media lost in Vietnam, the media is guilty. it's a fool's argument. The fairly undeniable estimate of Iraqi deaths by US and allied actions over the past decade, from degradation and destruction of infrastructure to war making and aerial bombing, is well over a million. Were our country to suffer that level of destruction we would probably all be "insurgents." General Petraeus is suggesting a minimum of 10 years' presence. For what? Oil? A huge base in Baghdad? This aricle is ... More »

Interesting attempt to quantify the impact of Al Qaeda's media war/terrorism strategy. Do members of the "Atrocity of the Day" media realize that their industry's tendencies are being exploited by the murderous thugs in Al Qaeda? As far as Al Qaeda is concerned, the battle is not for Baquba, it's for real-estate on the front page of the NYT and minutes on the nightly CNN broadcast. As long as the major story in terms of "GRP" coming out of Iraq is terrorist atrocities, the bad guys win--even if the true major stories coming out of Iraq, stories of the actual fighting and diplomacy, tell things differently.