<<The death of an American soldier is front page news, while the death of his attacker is buried deep inside the paper, if reported at all.>>
The deaths of American soldiers are NOT front page news. Not even second, third, or fourth page - usually reported at the bottom of some other piece describing how well things are going in Iraq.
The tone of that article seems to recall the old "body counts" of Vietnam - the garbage that more enemy is dying that our guys. It's irrelevant even though it's true, although I don't know it's actually the enemy that's dying or just some Iraqis in the wrong place at the wrong time.
The concept of massive retaliation for an RPG attack with 500 lb bombs dropped from F-16's is absurd, as if the bad guys hang around all day waiting for the planes to come. It's all for effect and little substance - like all hat and no cattle, something I'm sure our president understands.
The Army brass will know its tactics are working when the attacks against the grunts subside. If the attacks don't subside, well that also means the tactics are working according to Rumsfield. (Catch 22)**2
-wg
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
