Insurgents fought gunbattles with Iraqi and U.S. forces in Ramadi, west of Baghdad, but throughout the capital and much of the rest of the country, voting appeared to go smoothly and securely, with polls set to close at 5 p.m. (1400 GMT). ...
It was in marked contrast to the elections in January, when guerrillas carried out more than a hundred attacks on the day, including suicide bombings, killing at least 40 people.
Now does this mean that few attacks were made against polling facilities or that few attacks were made at all? The story seems to imply the latter. If that is the case, that seems like a major failure on the part of the enemy. Since the Sunnis are divided on the constitution question, would anybody say that the people opposed are not associated with the insurgency and the Sunnis for the constitution are associated and so that explains the lull?
And the jihadis are opposed so why didn't they launch a surge as they did in January? Indeed, I thought that there were several hundred attacks per day in the period around the election in January rather than the 100+ that this article notes.
Now, off with my son to the University of Michigan game against Penn State. We really should have maize and blue ink to dip our fingers in for a proper "V" sign.
UPDATE: A quick news item on TV said that about a dozen attacks contrasted sharply with the 300 attacks on the day of the January elections. This is quite a change.
And Michigan won. 27 - 25 in the last play of the game begun with one second left. My son and I were in the end zone seats right in front of the touchdown play.
Best. Game. Ever.
