Violence in Iraq isn't widespread. So?

This morning's Opinion Journal features an editorial column on Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, in which he notes that the violence in his country is not widespread, but limited to certain areas. He says:

"Two weeks ago I was in Najaf," he says of the holy city (population 560,000) in the Shiite south. "I went into the streets and into the people and it was calm." He claims that 14 of Iraq's 18 provinces are calm: "All Iraq is not Fallujah and Tal Afar."

I've heard that line of reasoning before, and it's got some usefulness against those who claim the entirety of Iraq is a hellhole. With all due respect to Mr. Talabani, however, it's not that great an argument. Could I get away with this variation?

"Two weeks ago, I was in Atlanta," he says of the city (population 425,000) in the American south. "I went into the streets and into the people and it was calm." He claims that 48 of the country's 50 states are calm: "All America is not New Orleans and the Gulf Coast."

The majority of the country may be calm and business as usual, but that does not mean the situation in the country as a whole is normal when hundreds of thousands of people are either dead, mourning loved ones, displaced, or trying to figure out how to start over from nothing.