The Imperfect Analysis Department

OK, I've had my moments, such as when I made the ill-fated prediction that the Caiman MRAP would be put out to pasture by BAE Systems.

Huffington Poster Bob Cesca staked out some rarefied territory with his inept analysis of the MRAP fatality from earlier this week. I hope I can't compete.

On Tuesday, an American gunner was killed when his MRAP vehicle hit a roadside bomb south of Baghdad. His comrades inside were wounded despite the MRAP armor. Reports didn't say whether or not the bomb was what's called an "explosively formed penetrator" or EFP roadside bomb which critics have warned has the power to rip through an MRAP's armored hull.

We make better armor -- they make deadlier bombs. Don't be afraid, though. Six months from now we're going to win the shit out of this war. But wait! Don't nobody move! Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria, says the war has ended!

(The Huffington Post)

Uh, Bob, the reports didn't mention whether or not the bomb was an EFP, but the reports gave enough information for you to figure it out on your own. Easily. Take the Jan. 23 edition of the LA Times. Please.

BAGHDAD -- A soldier killed last weekend just south of here was the U.S. military's first fatality in a new fleet of heavily armored vehicles designed to protect soldiers from roadside bombs, Pentagon Press Secretary Geoff Morrell said Tuesday.

A bomb that went off under the Mine Resistant Ambush Protected truck near Arab Jabour did not penetrate the cabin but threw the vehicle into the air and caused it to overturn, Morrell said.

Between "did not penetrate the cabin" and "threw the vehicle in the air" how could anyone think that the bomb in question may have been an EFP?

Making the deadlier bomb in this case meant making a very big bomb. Very big bombs require more explosive material than do smaller bombs (hopefully that concept requires no explanation).

Using a larger explosive will make the bombs generally easier to detect and harder to position. That puts pressure on the enemy. EFPs haven't lived up to the hype thus far, probably because AQI is disrupted to the point that the insurgents simply can't take advantage of the more advanced technology required to make on (as with acquiring copper disks that typically constitute the payload). If the insurgents want to rely on EFPs then they have another pressure point on their operations.

AQI is having a very tough time in Iraq. Their best bet is to try to score a few high-profile victories (like blowing up MRAPs) and then let antiwar-types write about it as though it's the end of the world, putting pressure on the government to do a premature drawdown.

As for Cesca's claim that the insurgents simply respond to better armor by making better bombs ... what took them so long? We've been ramping up the use of MRAPs in Iraq for six months, and the program wasn't exactly a closely guarded secret.

Posts like Cesca's simply undergird the impression that liberals are rooting for defeat. He suggests that Newsweek's Fareed Zakaria claimed the "war has ended" though Zakaria actually wrote that the "war has largely ended." Perhaps Cesca just needs a reminder to avoid over-reliance on hyperbole.

One wonders what sorts of blog entries he'd have composed during WW2.


Updated URL 1-25-08

*****