it seems pretty clear that the results of this action are not yet fully understood by the public--while trying to get an idea of what was being talked about above, i looked at a site called occupation watch, which is for the most part an accumulation of wire service stories.
on the death toll (official iraqi version)--around 2100.
source:
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7998
this is an ap story attributed to the boston globe--so i assume that the numbers are quite official.
this number was cited in le monde yesterday as well, with the additional information that most of the dead are not identifiable (no papers, whatever) which would make any meaningful distinction insurgent/civilian impossible. draw from this the conclusions that you like.
it is obvious that these numbers are preliminary---
the figure has climbed by 500 over the past few days, as has been noted above.
i have seen other, higher numbers but was not in a position to track anything down about them, so only mention them here.
i assume that 2100 is low and partial.
for a glimpse of the action in fallujah, not prechewed for american conservative consumption by the sycophants in the dominant media here, check this out:
http://www.occupationwatch.org/article.php?id=7987
fallujah was the type of ringing success that i expected in another way as well: it seems that a dozen of so iraqi political parties are looking to push the elections back six months from jan. 2005.
cowboy george of course is not pleased.
i am not sure from this what the administration can do about it, but it looks to me like this is the best index yet that fallujah was not as the american right preferred to imagine, that there was no big confrontation with a (hallucinated) centralized opposition, that nothing is more secure for it.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/26/in...rtner=homepage
but there are alot more people dead.