Iraq: Top Commander Sites Positives
But Will Democrats Take A Look?

SLATE

Why do we have such a hard time hearing good news from Baghdad?Iraq's Budget Surplus Scandal

By Christopher Hitchens

Full article Christopher Hitchens Slate

Excerpts:

Updated Monday, Aug. 11, 2008, at 6:53 AM ET

One day I will publish my entire collection of upside-down Iraq headlines, where the true purport of the story is the inverse of the intended one. (Top billing thus far would go to the greatest downer of them all: the tale of Iraq's unemployed gravediggers, their always-insecure standard of living newly imperiled by the falling murder rate. You don't believe me? Wait for the forthcoming anthology.) While you wait, you might consider last week's astonishing report about the Iraqi budget surplus and the way in which the report was reported.

Largely attributable to the bonanza in oil prices, to new discoveries of oil since the eviction of Saddam Hussein, and to the increasing success of Iraqi exports via the pipelines to Turkey, this surplus could amount to as much as $79 billion by the end of this year. A good chunk of that money is sitting safely in a bank in New York. I would call this good news by any standard, though of course I understand the annoyance of Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., and others involved in the auditing of Iraq, who complain that all the unspent wealth is a bit much, given the heavy outlay from the U.S. treasury for the rebuilding of Mesopotamia.

Yes indeed, Iraq should pay for its own reconstruction. But, just before we all join hands on this obvious proposition, may we take a moment to apologize to Paul Wolfowitz? Of all the many slanders hurled at this advocate for Iraq's liberation, probably none was more gleefully bandied about than his congressional testimony that Iraq's recovery from decades of war and fascism could be self-financing. Now the opponents of the intervention are yelling that Iraq ought to be opening its bulging wallet right away.

RS REDSTATE

Barack Obama's Judgment Means Longer Wars

John McCain Gets the Response Right

Posted by: Mark Impomeni

Saturday, July 19, 2008 at 08:00A

Full article Mark Impomeni RS REDSTATE

Excerpts:

The McCain campaign has been showing signs of life, as Moe deftly points out. There is one issue that we know motivates McCain enough to go on the offensive, and that is national security in general and the war in Iraq in particular. Barack Obama is set to travel to Iraq to view firsthand the success of the troop surge strategy that he opposed. And the McCain campaign isn't about to let him try to share in the credit.

The campaign released a statement yesterday, reacting to the news that the Bush Administration and the Iraqi government have come to an agreement on a "general time horizon" for the continued presence of U.S. troops in Iraq. To some on the left, the announcement is vindication for Obama's plan to remove troops from Iraq quickly. For some on the right, the announcement pulls the rug out from under John McCain, who has steadfastly argued that the duration of the U.S. troop presence should be determined by conditions, not politics. Both are evidence of shallow thinking.

Rather than a defeat for McCain, and evidence of the prescience of the Senator from H.O.P.E.™, the announcement is a vindication of McCain's call for a surge of troops to begin with. It is evidence of the correctness of Republican and Administration policies on the war and should be celebrated as such. It also shows the dangerous irony of Obama's and liberals' timidity on matters of war. In their zeal to end hostilities and prevent casualties, Democratic policies lead to longer wars and more bloodshed.

AL QAEDA'S MARKET CRASH

New York Post

Ralph Peters

July 19, 2008

Full article Ralph Peters New York Post

Excerpts:

IF you think the US markets have problems, look at the value of al Qaeda shares throughout the Muslim world: A high-flying political equity just a few years ago, its stock has tanked. It made the wrong strategic investments and squandered its moral capital.

In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, Osama bin Laden was the darling of the Arab street, seen as the most successful Muslim in centuries. The Saudi royal family paid him protection money, while individual princes handed over cash willingly: Al Qaeda seemed like the greatest thing since the right to abuse multiple wives.

Osama appeared on T-shirts and his taped utterances were awaited with fervent excitement. Recruits flocked to al Qaeda not because of "American aggression," but because, after countless failures, it looked like the Arabs had finally produced a winner.

WASHINGTON POST

Barack Is Rigid Though the Whole Situation Has Changed

The Iron Timetable

Whether the war in Iraq is being lost or won, Barack Obama's strategy remains unchanged.

Full article Washington Post

Excerpts:

BARACK OBAMA yesterday accused President Bush and Sen. John McCain of rigidity on Iraq: "They said we couldn't leave when violence was up, they say we can't leave when violence is down." Mr. Obama then confirmed his own foolish consistency. Early last year, when the war was at its peak, the Democratic candidate proposed a timetable for withdrawing all U.S. combat forces in slightly more than a year. Yesterday, with bloodshed at its lowest level since the war began, Mr. Obama endorsed the same plan. After hinting earlier this month that he might "refine" his Iraq strategy after visiting the country and listening to commanders, Mr. Obama appears to have decided that sticking to his arbitrary, 16-month timetable is more important than adjusting to the dramatic changes in Iraq.

Mr. Obama's charge against the Republicans was not entirely fair, since Mr. Bush has overseen the withdrawal of five American brigades from Iraq this year, and Mr. McCain has suggested that he would bring most of the rest of the troops home by early 2013. Mr. Obama's timeline would end in the summer of 2010, a year or two before the earliest dates proposed recently by members of the Iraqi government. The real difference between the various plans is not the dates but the conditions: Both the Iraqis and Mr. McCain say the withdrawal would be linked to the ability of Iraqi forces to take over from U.S. troops, as they have begun to do. Mr. Obama's strategy allows no such linkage -- his logic is that a timetable unilaterally dictated from Washington is necessary to force Iraqis to take responsibility for the country.

WALL STREET JOURNAL

The New Reality in Iraq

By FREDERICK W. KAGAN , KIMBERLY KAGAN AND JACK KEANE

July 16, 2008; Page A17

Full article FREDERICK W. KAGAN , KIMBERLY KAGAN AND JACK KEANE WSJ

Excerpts:

All of the most important objectives of the surge have been accomplished in Iraq. The sectarian civil war is ended; al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) has been dealt a devastating blow; and the Sadrist militia and other Iranian-backed militant groups have been disrupted.

Meanwhile, the Iraqi government has accomplished almost all of the legislative benchmarks set by the U.S. Congress and the Bush administration. More important, it is gaining wider legitimacy among the population. The attention of Iraqis across the country is focused on the upcoming provincial elections, which will be a pivotal moment in Iraq's development.

The result is that we have an extraordinary – but fleeting – opportunity to advance America's security and the stability of a vital region of the world.

Commentary Magazine.COM

Maliki's Demands

Max Boot

Full article Max Boot Commentary Magazine

Excerpts:

How concerned should we be about demands emanating from the Maliki government for a withdrawal timetable for U.S. troops? Unless something changes dramatically, the answer I would give is: not very.

That's not because the situation in Iraq is so stable that we can pull out American forces without doing any damage. Despite recent gains in security, the situation remains fragile and U.S. forces will need to remain in Iraq for years to nurture this embattled democracy--and not so incidentally to protect our own interests in the region. The good news is that Prime Minister Maliki, along with every other major figure in Iraqi politics, understands this. But they also understand that the people of Iraq are impatient for the return of full sovereignty and for the departure of foreign troops from their soil.

With provincial elections coming up in the fall, there is every incentive for Maliki and other Iraqi politicos to show they are not puppets of Uncle Sam. They are driving a hard bargain in the negotiations over a Status of Forces Agreement and a Strategic Framework Agreement that will set the future conditions of the U.S. military presence. And they are blustering about the need to withdraw U.S. troops-eventually. But note that, unlike Barack Obama, they are not attaching any timelines to this withdrawal. Certainly they are not calling for U.S. troops to be gone by 2010, a pledge that the Democratic candidate once made and hasn't quite renounced.

The U.S. has now found massive amounts of uranium yellowcake, that can be refined into nuclear weapons or nuclear near Baghdad.

The U.S. recently has helped the Iraqi government ship to Canada. It has been bought by a Canadian company for further processing into nuclear fuel. This for the purpose of keeping it from potential use by terrorists or unsavory regimes in the region.

THE NEW YORK TIMES

The Bush Paradox

By DAVID BROOKS

Published: June 24, 2008

Full article David Brooks New York Times

Excerpts:

Let’s go back and consider how the world looked in the winter of 2006-2007. Iraq was in free fall, with horrific massacres and ethnic cleansing that sent a steady stream of bad news across the world media. The American public delivered a stunning electoral judgment against the Iraq war, the Republican Party and President Bush.

Expert and elite opinion swung behind the Baker-Hamilton report, which called for handing more of the problems off to the Iraqi military and wooing Iran and Syria. Republicans on Capitol Hill were quietly contemptuous of the president while Democrats were loudly so.

Democratic leaders like Senator Harry Reid considered the war lost. Barack Obama called for a U.S. withdrawal starting in the spring of 2007, while Senator Reid offered legislation calling for a complete U.S. pullback by March 2008.

REAL CLEAR POLITICS

June 21, 2008

The Facts in Iraq Are Changing

By Michael Barone

Full article Michale Barone RCP

Excerpts:

As we enter the second half of the campaign year, facts are undermining the Democratic narrative that has dominated our politics since about the time Hurricane Katrina rolled into the Gulf coast -- most importantly, the facts about Iraq.

During the Democratic primary season, all the party's candidates veered hardly a jot or tittle from the narrative that helped the Democrats sweep the November 2006 elections. Iraq is spiraling into civil war, we invaded unwisely and have botched things ever since, no good outcome is possible, and it is time to get out of there as fast as we can.

In January 2007, when George W. Bush ordered the surge strategy, which John McCain had advocated since the summer of 2003, Barack Obama informed us that the surge couldn't work. The only thing to do was to get out as soon as possible.

WASHINGTON POST.COM

A Partnership With Iraq

The Shiite government signals a desire for an alliance with the United States. Shouldn't that be welcomed?

Sunday, June 15, 2008; Page B06

Full article Washington Post.Com

Excerpts:

THOUGH IT was hardly noticed in Washington, Iraq's Shiite-led government sent a powerful message to Iran and to the Middle East last week. Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, whose coalition is often portrayed as an Iranian client, traveled to Tehran for a meeting with supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. The ayatollah bluntly declared that Iraq's "most important problem" was the continuing presence of U.S. troops. He pressured Mr. Maliki to stop negotiating a package of agreements with the Bush administration that would delineate a "strategic framework" between Iraq and the United States and provide for the deployment of U.S. forces beyond the expiration of a U.N. mandate at the end of this year.

Mr. Maliki refused. He assured his Iranian hosts that Iraq would not be a launching pad for an American attack on Iran. But he pointedly told a press briefing that negotiations on the strategic partnership would continue. He repeated that commitment on Friday, even after warning that the talks had "reached a dead end." In effect, the Iraqi prime minister was saying that his country does not want to become an Iranian satellite but an independent Arab state that would look to the United States to ensure its security.

This would seem to be an obvious U.S. gain in what, according to Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) as well as President Bush, is the urgent task of countering Iran's attempt to dominate the Middle East. It means that Iraq, a country with the world's second largest oil reserves and a strategic linchpin of the Middle East, just might emerge from the last five years of war and turmoil as an American ally, even if its relations with Iran remain warm.

TOWNHALL.COM

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Bush's America: 100% Al-Qaeda Free Since 2001

By Ann Coulter

Full article Ann Coulter Townhall.Com

Excerpts:

n a conversation recently, I mentioned as an aside what a great president George Bush has been and my friend was surprised. I was surprised that he was surprised.

I generally don't write columns about the manifestly obvious, but, yes, the man responsible for keeping Americans safe from another terrorist attack on American soil for nearly seven years now will go down in history as one of America's greatest presidents.

Produce one person who believed, on Sept. 12, 2001, that there would not be another attack for seven years, and I'll consider downgrading Bush from "Great" to "Really Good."

WALL STREET JOURNAL

How Prime Minister Maliki Pacified Iraq

By KIMBERLY KAGAN and FREDERICK W. KAGAN

June 10, 2008; Page A17

Full article KIMBERLY KAGAN and FREDERICK W. KAGAN WSJ

Excerpts:

America is very close to succeeding in Iraq. The "near-strategic defeat" of al Qaeda in Iraq described by CIA Director Michael Hayden last month in the Washington Post has been followed by the victory of the Iraqi government's security forces over illegal Shiite militias, including Iranian-backed Special Groups. The enemies of Iraq and America now cling desperately to their last bastions, while the political process builds momentum.[How Prime Minister Maliki Pacified Iraq]ReutersIraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki presses the flesh in Basra, March 29, 2008.

These tremendous gains remain fragile and could be lost to skillful enemy action, or errors in Baghdad or Washington. But where the U.S. was unequivocally losing in Iraq at the end of 2006, we are just as unequivocally winning today.

By February 2008, America and its partners accomplished a series of tasks thought to be impossible. The Sunni Arab insurgency and al Qaeda in Iraq were defeated in Anbar, Diyala and Baghdad provinces, and the remaining leaders and fighters clung to their last urban outpost in Mosul. The Iraqi government passed all but one of the "benchmark" laws (the hydrocarbon law being the exception, but its purpose is now largely accomplished through the budget) and was integrating grass-roots reconciliation with central political progress. The sectarian civil war had ended.

ABC NEWS

How Will Good News in Iraq Affect Obama Vs. McCain?

Recent Successes in Iraq Would Seem to Benefit McCain but Could Also Help Obama

By MARCUS BARAM

FULL ARTICLE Marcus Baram ABC News

Excerpts:

Their strong views on the Iraq War helped them stand out from their competitors during the presidential primaries.

And Republican John McCain and Democrat Barack Obama's sharp policy differences on the conflict continue to define them as the presumptive nominees prepare for the general election.

But the recent spurt of good news out of Iraq -- from the drop in American casualties to the increasing political stability of the Maliki government -- presents new challenges for both candidates and could change the dynamic of the race.

June 9, 2008

WALL STREET JOURNAL

GLOBAL VIEW

By BRET STEPHENS

June 3, 2008

Full article Bret Stephens WSJ

Excerpts:

There Is a Military Solution to Terror

Sadr City in Baghdad, the northeastern districts of Sri Lanka and the Guaviare province of Colombia have little in common culturally, historically or politically. But they are crucial reference points on a global map in which long-running insurgencies suddenly find themselves on the verge of defeat.

For the week of May 16-23, there were 300 "violent incidents" in Iraq. That's down from 1,600 last June and the lowest recorded since March 2004. Al Qaeda has been crushed by a combination of U.S. arms and Sunni tribal resistance. On the Shiite side, Moqtada al Sadr's Mahdi Army was routed by Iraqi troops in Basra and later crumbled in its Sadr City stronghold.

In Colombia, the 44-year-old FARC guerrilla movement is now at its lowest ebb. Three of its top commanders died in March, and the number of FARC attacks is down by more than two-thirds since 2002. In the face of a stepped-up campaign by the Colombian military (funded, equipped and trained by the U.S.), the group is now experiencing mass desertions. Former FARC leaders describe a movement that is losing any semblance of ideological coherence and operational effectiveness.

Win the War?

Yes, We Can!

by Matthew Continetti

06/09/2008

Full article Matthew Continetti The Weekly Standard

Excerpts:

Don't look now, but evidence of progress in the war on terror is just about everywhere. Last week CIA director Michael Hayden noted some U.S. accomplishments for the Washington Post: "Near strategic defeat of al-Qaeda in Iraq. Near strategic defeat for al-Qaeda in Saudi Arabia. Significant setbacks for al-Qaeda globally." USA Today: Attacks in Iraq are "down 70 percent since President Bush ordered a U.S. troop increase, or 'surge,' early last year."

The New Yorker's Lawrence Wright devoted a long essay to Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, onetime mentor to Ayman al Zawahiri, who now criticizes his former protégé and Osama bin Laden and suggests they be put on trial. In the New Republic, Peter Bergen and Paul Cruickshank told the story of Sheikh Salman al-Awdah, author of an open letter attacking bin Laden and violent jihad that has caused shockwaves across the Muslim world. The sheikhs of Anbar Province in Iraq lead a national, transsectarian movement preparing for provincial elections by the end of the year. Polling shows a widespread decline in support among Muslims for suicide bombing and for bin Laden. Fareed Zakaria observed that the number of Islamist attacks worldwide has declined precipitously since 2004.

How did this happen? It is partly due to Muslim outrage at al Qaeda's killing of its coreligionists. It is partly due to Muslim rejection of al Qaeda's malign interpretation of Islam. For these reasons, Bergen and Cruickshank wrote that "encoded in the DNA of apocalyptic jihadist groups like Al Qaeda are the seeds of theirown long-term destruction."

U.S. Cites Big Gains Against Al-Qaeda

Group Is Facing Setbacks Globally, CIA Chief Says

By Joby Warrick

Washington Post Staff Writer

Friday, May 30, 2008; Page A01

Full article Joby Warrick Washington Post

Excerpts:

Less than a year after his agency warned of new threats from a resurgent al-Qaeda, CIA Director Michael V. Hayden now portrays the terrorist movement as essentially defeated in Iraq and Saudi Arabia and on the defensive throughout much of the rest of the world, including in its presumed haven along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

In a strikingly upbeat assessment, the CIA chief cited major gains against al-Qaeda's allies in the Middle East and an increasingly successful campaign to destabilize the group's core leadership.

While cautioning that al-Qaeda remains a serious threat, Hayden said Osama bin Laden is losing the battle for hearts and minds in the Islamic world and has largely forfeited his ability to exploit the Iraq war to recruit adherents. Two years ago, a CIA study concluded that the U.S.-led war had become a propaganda and marketing bonanza for al-Qaeda, generating cash donations and legions of volunteers.

The Weekly Standard

Change That Matters

Iraq has changed. Why can't the Democrats?

by Matthew Continetti

06/02/2008

Full article Matthew Continetti The Weekly Standard

Excerpts:

General David Petraeus was back in Washington last week. President Bush has promoted him to chief of Central Command (CENTCOM), which requires Senate confirmation. Under Petraeus's leadership, Iraq has changed dramatically. Why can't the Democrats change with it?

Bush announced the surge in January 2007. Iraq was a violent place. Al Qaeda in Iraq held large swaths of territory. Shiite death squads roamed much of Baghdad. The Iraqi political class seemed feckless. Hence Bush's decision to send more troops, replace General George Casey with Petraeus, and change the mission from force protection and search-and-destroy to population security. The new strategy's strongest proponent and supporter was Senator John McCain.

Democrats opposed the surge almost without exception. Barack Obama said that the new policy would neither "make a dent" in the violence plaguing Iraq nor "change the dynamics" there. A month after the president's announcement, Obama declared it was time to remove American combat troops from Iraq. In April, as the surge brigades were on their way to the combat zone, Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid proclaimed "this war is lost" and that U.S. troops should pack up and come home. In July, as surge operations were underway, the New York Times editorialized that "it is time for the United States to leave Iraq." The Times's editorial writers recognized Iraq "could be even bloodier and more chaotic after Americans leave." But that didn't matter. "Keeping troops in Iraq will only make things worse."

NEWSWEEK

The Only Thing We Have to Fear ...

Full article Fareed Zakaria Newsweek

Excerpts:

You know that we are living in scary times. Terrorist groups are metastasizing all over the globe. Al Qaeda has re-established its bases in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Hizbullah, Hamas and other radical Islamic groups are gaining strength.

You hear this stuff all the time, on television and on the campaign trail. Amid the din, it's hard to figure out the facts. Well, finally we have a well-researched, independent analysis of the data relating to terrorism, released last week by Canada's Simon Fraser University. Its findings will surprise you.

It explains that there is a reason you're scared. The U.S. government agency charged with tracking terrorist attacks, the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), reported a 41 percent increase from 2005 to 2006 and then equally high levels in 2007.

Another major, government-funded database of terrorism, the Memorial Institute for the Prevention of Terror (MIPT), says that the annual toll of fatalities from terrorism grew 450 percent (!) between 1998 and 2006. A third report, the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism (START), also government-funded, recorded a 75 percent jump in 2004, the most recent year available for the data it uses.

The Simon Fraser study points out that all three of these data sets have a common problem. They count civilian casualties from the war in Iraq as deaths caused by terrorism. This makes no sense.

Iraq is a war zone, and as in other war zones around the world, many of those killed are civilians. Study director Prof. Andrew Mack notes, "Over the past 30 years, civil wars in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Angola, Liberia, Sierra Leone, Uganda, Bosnia, Guatemala, and elsewhere have, like Iraq, been notorious for the number of civilians killed.

But although the slaughter in these cases was intentional, politically motivated, and perpetrated by non-state groups—and thus constituted terrorism as conceived by MIPT, NCTC, and START—it was almost never described as such." To take just two examples, Mack pointed out that in 2004, the Janjaweed militia killed at least 723 civilians in Sudan (as documented by independent studies).

The MIPT recorded zero deaths in Sudan from terrorism that year; START counted only 17. In Congo in 1999, independent studies identified hundreds killed by militia actions. The MIPT notes zero deaths that year from terrorism; and START, seven.

If you set aside the war in Iraq, terrorism has in fact gone way down over the past five years.

Jun 2, 2008 Issue

YAHOO !.NEWS

US ambassador: Al-Qaida close to defeat in Iraq

LEE KEATH, Associated Press

Full article LEE KEATH, Associated Press

Excerpts:

BAGHDAD - The U.S. ambassador to Iraq said Saturday that al-Qaida's network in the country has never been closer to defeat, and he praised Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki for his moves to rein in Shiite and Sunni militant groups.ADVERTISEMENT

Ryan Crocker's comments came as Iraqi forces have been conducting crackdowns on al-Qaida militants in the northern city of Mosul and on Shiite militiamen in the southern city of Basra. Thousands of Iraqi forces also moved into the Shiite militia stronghold of Sadr City in Baghdad last week imposing control for the first time in years.

But truces with the powerful Mahdi Army militia that have calmed violence in Basra and paved the way for the Sadr City deployment have been strained in the past two days.

'Terror On Wane,' 'Al-Qaida On Run' And Other Headlines You Won't See

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Thursday

May 22, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Full article INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Thursday

Excerpts:

Mileposts: As President Bush's term winds down, signs are there that the war on terror is being won. The conflict in Iraq is ebbing, and worldwide terror attacks are down. When will someone call it what it is? VICTORY.

Back from the front, Gen. David Petraeus called on Congress Thursday to begin considering a drawdown of U.S. troops after five years of war. Violence in Iraq has plunged to its lowest levels since 2004, and al-Qaida is a tattered shadow of its formerself — key leaders dead, successors weak and recruiting down.

"My sense" Petraeus said, "is I will be able to make a recommendation (in the autumn) for further reductions."

NEW YORK POST

SUCCESS IN IRAQ: A MEDIA BLACKOUT

Ralph Peters

Full article Ralph Peters New York Post

Excerpts:

DO we still have troops in Iraq? Is there still a conflict over there?

If you rely on the so-called mainstream media, you may have difficulty answering those questions these days. As Iraqi and Coalition forces pile up one success after another, Iraq has magically vanished from the headlines.

Want a real "inconvenient truth?" Progress in Iraq is powerful and accelerating.

REAL CLEAR POLITICS

May 10, 2008

Rethinking the Iraq Critics

By Michael Barone

Full article Michael Barone RCP

Excerpts:

In trying to understand news about the conflicts in Iraq, I work to keep in mind the difference between what we know now about decision making in World War II and what most Americans knew at the time. From the memoirs and documents published after the war, we've learned how leaders made critical judgments. But at the time, even well-informed journalists only could guess at what was going on behind the scenes.

Today we're only beginning to learn about what went on behind the scenes in regard to Iraq. One important new source is the recently published "War and Decision" by Douglas Feith, the No. 3 civilian at the Pentagon from 2001 to 2005. Feith quotes extensively from unpublished documents and contemporary memorandums, just as in the late 1940s Robert Sherwood did in "Roosevelt and Hopkins" and Winston Churchill did in his World War II histories. The picture Feith paints is at considerable variance from the narratives with which we've become familiar.

One such narrative is, "Bush lied; people died." The claim is that "neocons," including Feith, politicized intelligence to show that Saddam Hussein's regime had weapons of mass destruction. Not so, as the Senate Intelligence Committee and the Silberman-Robb Commission have concluded already. Every intelligence agency believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and the post-invasion Duelfer report concluded that he maintained the capability to produce them on short notice. There was abundant evidence of contacts between Saddam's regime and al-Qaida and other terrorist groups. Given Saddam's hostility to the United States and his stonewalling of the United Nations, American leaders had every reason to believe he posed a grave threat. Removing him removed that threat.

WALL STREET JOURNAL

The Truth About Iraq's Casualty Count

By MAX BOOT

May 3, 2008; Page A11

Full article Max Boot WSJ

Excerpts:

The newspapers are predictably filled with articles about how 52 U.S. soldiers died in Iraq last month – the highest toll since September. Iraqi civilian casualties are also said to be at the highest level since August. These losses are being used to cast aspersions on claims of progress in Iraq.

Even one death is too many and 52 deaths is tragedy multiplied 52-fold. But let's keep some perspective. As the icasualties.org website makes clear, for better or worse, April was still one of the lighter-casualty months during the long war in Iraq.

More important, casualties cannot be looked at in a vacuum. A spike in casualties could be a sign that the enemy is gaining strength. Or it could be a sign that tough combat is under way that will lead to the enemy's defeat and the creation of a more peaceful environment in the future.

REAL CLEAR POLITICS

April 23, 2008

Back to Basra

By Austin Bay

Full article Austin Bay RCP

Excerpts:

Remember the Iraqi government's Basra offensive, launched a month ago and quickly declared a failure by an overwhelming majority of the talk show and editorial commentators? "Basra Blunder" was the headline of a column that received wide distribution; the column described Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki as an inept, impulsive figure "in way over his head."

Today, Maliki and Iraqis in general have earned the right to sneer at such instant and shallow media negativism, for Knights Charge (code name for the anti-Shia gang offensive in Basra and southern Iraq) is proving to be an extraordinarily significant political and military operation with rather heady long-term payoffs.

That's key -- understanding Knights Charge is an integrated political-military operation. Maliki made it clear that this multidimensional operation was planned and executed by the Iraqis themselves and that the United States was not consulted. For this, his insta-critics chastised him. But Maliki knows his enemies, particularly Mahdi Army chieftain Moqtada al-Sadr.

Wall Street Journal

April 11, 2008

Let's 'Surge' Some More

By MICHAEL YON

Full article Wall Street Journal

Excerpts:

It is said that generals always fight the last war. But when David Petraeus came to town it was senators – on both sides of the aisle – who battled over the Iraq war of 2004-2006. That war has little in common with the war we are fighting today.

I may well have spent more time embedded with combat units in Iraq than any other journalist alive. I have seen this war – and our part in it – at its brutal worst. And I say the transformation over the last 14 months is little short of miraculous.

The change goes far beyond the statistical decline in casualties or incidents of violence. A young Iraqi translator, wounded in battle and fearing death, asked an American commander to bury his heart in America. Iraqi special forces units took to the streets to track down terrorists who killed American soldiers. The U.S. military is the most respected institution in Iraq, and many Iraqi boys dream of becoming American soldiers. Yes, young Iraqi boys know about "GoArmy.com."

U.S. News & World Report

Wednesday April 9, 2008

By James Pethokoukis

Full article James Pethokoukis U.S. News & World Report

Excerpts:

Was Iraq worth it? That's the economic question Democrats are again highlighting because of Gen. David Petraeus's congressional testimony this week.

And implicit in that question is the assumption that even if the surge works and Iraq someday ends up as a democratic capitalist, antiterrorist ally of America, the price has been too high—whether that price is $500 billion, the amount currently spent on the war, or the $1 trillion to $3 trillion that some economists like Joseph Stiglitz are forecasting the conflict will eventually cost U.S. taxpayers.

(Those high estimates include every possible related cost, such as higher oil prices and future medical care for our injured warriors.)

OK, the numbers are what the numbers are. But let me add some perspective. If the high number is correct, then the Iraq war will have cost as much as World War II, in inflation-adjusted dollars. Keep in mind, though, that WWII cost twice as much as the nation's total gross domestic product in the 1940s, while Iraq would be the equivalent of maybe a quarter of the modern U.S. economy. And as a pure matter of economic and scenario planning, this all strikes me as a bit simplistic, anyway. A few observations:

1) It should be tough for anyone to take seriously the financial concerns of politicians—of either party—who are doing nothing about the $2 trillion in additional long-term liabilities (that is the number former U.S. Comptroller General David Walker cited to me last week) that Medicare and Social Security are racking up every additional year that no action is taken.

("Neither party is too good at math," Walker joked.) By my back-of-the envelope calculation, the cost of doing nothing on these issues during the span since we invaded and liberated Iraq works out to some $10 trillion.

Real Clear Politics

Gen. Petraeus' Testimony to the Senate Armed Services Comm.By David Petraeus

General David H. Petraeus, Commander, Multi-National Force-Iraq

Testimony to Senate Armed Services Committee

April 8, 2008

Full article Real Clear Politics

Excerpts:

GEN. PETRAEUS: Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member, members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to provide an update on the security situation in Iraq and to discuss the recommendations I recently provided to my chain of command.

Since Ambassador Crocker and I appeared before you seven months ago there has been significant but uneven security progress in Iraq.

Since September, levels of violence and civilian deaths have been reduced substantially, Al Qaeda-Iraq and a number of other extremist elements have been dealt serious blows, the capabilities of Iraqi security force elements have grown, and there has been noteworthy involvement of local Iraqis in local security.

REAL CLEAR POLITICS

April 02, 2008

Whittling Away at Sadr

By Austin Bay

Full article Austin Bay Real Clear Politics

Excerpts:

After his outlaw militiamen raised white flags and skedaddled from their latest round of combat with the Iraqi Army, radical Shia cleric Moqtada al-Sadr declared victory.

He always does. He understands media bravado. He wagers that survival bandaged by bombast and swathed in sensational headlines is a short-term triumph. Survive long enough, and Sadr bets he will prevail.

This time, Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki issued a contrarian press release, however, calling the Iraqi Army's anti-militia operations in southern Iraq a "success."

REAL CLEAR POLITICS

March 21, 2008

Iraq: The Real Story

By Oliver North

Full article Ollie North Real Clear Politics

Some Up To The Minute Stats

-- Despite how it has been portrayed, today's all-volunteer U.S. military is the brightest and most educated, trained and equipped armed force ever fielded by any nation. More than 1.6 million American military personnel have served in Iraq. Notwithstanding the perception that our armed forces are stretched beyond the breaking point, re-enlistments never have been higher, and every service is exceeding its recruiting goals.

-- Iraq's police, military and security forces, widely depicted as ineffective or worse, have grown by more than 100,000 in the past year and have assumed responsibility for nine of 18 provinces.

-- In the past 12 months, the Interior Ministry has opened 13 new training facilities. The Iraqi military now has 134 active combat, infrastructure and special operations battalions, with a total of nearly 647,000 Iraqis who have volunteered to serve in uniform.

-- After we first reported on the Anbar Awakening in December 2006, the Sons of Iraq movement has crossed the Sunni-Shiite sectarian divide and now has 91,000 members. In the same time frame, attacks against Iraqi civilians and coalition forces have dropped by more than 70 percent.

-- Since 2004, more than 4,000 civil reconstruction projects -- including 325 for electrical distribution and 320 water treatment facilities -- have been completed. More than 3,000 schools and 75 hospitals, clinics and health care facilities have been renovated or built from the ground up while nearly 3,200 primary health care providers and physicians were being trained.

-- There are now more than 100 privately owned radio stations, 31 television stations and 600 newspapers published in Iraq -- a nation just slightly larger than California.

-- In February, crude oil production exceeded 2.4 million barrels per day, and this year, the Iraqi economy is projected to grow by 7 percent.

SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE

Surge success will fade unless we get the politics right in Iraq

Larry Diamond

Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Full article Larry Diamond San Francisco Chronicle

Excerpts:

Five years after the launch of a war in Iraq that never found weapons of mass destruction and has not yet established democracy either, there are reasons to believe that a corner has been turned. The military "surge," which added about 30,000 U.S. troops, has had a significant, positive impact.

Although it has been creeping back up again recently, violence has declined sharply. Since the surge took hold in mid-2007, the average daily death toll of Iraqis has dropped from over 100 per day to less than 20. Almost 500 Iraqis dying violently per month is still horrific, but the improvement is palpable, and evident in many other statistics.

Iraqi police and military deaths are also way down, from a peak of 300 in April 2007 to 110 last month. Multiple fatality bombings have fallen by more than two-thirds since their peak of 69 at the end of 2006. American troop fatalities have also dropped sharply, from more than 100 per month in late 2006 and early 2007 to under 40 per month in the last few months.

The Boston Globe

Patton and the 2008 vote

By Jeff Jacoby

Full article Jeff Jacoby The Boston Globe

Excerpts:

ON THE eve of the Normandy invasion in 1944, General George S. Patton, addressing the men of the US Third Army, delivered a speech that would become legendary long before George C. Scott reenacted it on a Hollywood soundstage.

"Americans love a winner," Patton growled, "and will not tolerate a loser. Americans despise cowards. Americans play to win - all the time. I wouldn't give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed. . . . The very thought of losing is hateful to an American."

Nowadays, the thought of losing a war isn't as hateful to some Americans as the thought of losing an election. Recall MoveOn.org's infamous "General Betray Us" ad last fall, which was intended to undercut the commander of US forces in Iraq. Think of Senate majority leader Harry Reid's insistence that "this war is lost and the surge is not accomplishing anything," or Barack Obama's unbudging claim that the "strategy is failed" and we must "get our troops out," or Hillary Clinton's vow that "starting on day one of my presidency, we will begin . . . to withdraw our troops within 60 days."

Townhall.Com

Iraq War Could Help GOP Win in November

By Linda Chavez

Full article Linda Chavez Townhall.Com

Excerpts:

A funny thing happened on the way to the election: Many Americans had a change of heart about the war in Iraq. No, I'm not talking about the large numbers of Americans who now think that the United States should never have gone to war in the first place, or those who want the troops brought home immediately. To the contrary, two recent Pew Research Center polls show that Americans are more upbeat in their assessment of the Iraq War than at any time in the last couple of years and less focused on American casualties there. Responses to a number of the surveys' questions suggest problems ahead for the Democrats, no matter which candidate the party nominates.

The findings from the nonpartisan Pew Research Center come from two separate surveys, one on the presidential election and another on the public awareness of various public policy and political issues. In the first survey of 1,508 Americans taken over four days in late February, Pew asked respondents a variety of questions about their attitudes toward the presidential candidates and various issues in the campaign, including several questions on Iraq, Afghanistan and the war on terror. The second survey on awareness of issues included 1,003 adults and was taken Feb. 28-March 2.

What emerged was a complicated picture of American attitudes, but one that should give some solace to Republican candidate Sen. John McCain.

Contentions

The Dems’ Iraq Paralysis

Abe Greenwald - 03.13.2008 - 11:27

Full article: Abe Greenwald Contentions

Excerpts:

The Democrats may call it “George Bush’s war,” but a new Pew Poll reveals that most Americans think we are going to win it. 53 percent of those polled said “the U.S. will ultimately succeed in achieving its goals” in Iraq. Those who feel the war is going “very well” or “fairly well” have leaped from 30 percent about a year ago to 48 percent today. This new, widespread confidence in America’s Iraq effort presents a sizable problem for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, both of whom have used the “unpopular war” as a focal point.

Here is their unenviable task: to tell the American voter that his or her confidence in America’s ability to win at last is misplaced; to convince them what we need to do instead is pull our troops out and call for a troop surge in Afghanistan. Even more challenging for the Democrats is that time is not on their side. As recently as September 2007, only 42 percent of Americans believed the U.S. would succeed in Iraq. That number jumped 11 points in five months. The Democratic national convention is another five months away, and the benefits of the troop surge continue to mount. Just imagine the presidential nominee having to tell 64 percent of the country that they’re wrong about American victory.

The Democrats hitched their presidential hopes to a sense of national defeat that wasn’t sustained by circumstances. If there’s one thing every military expert will tell you, it’s that war is fluid. Defeatism does not allow for this fluidity. Once you declare a war lost, you’ve closed the door on the possibilities that arise with the changing nature of the fight and any potential innovations to capitalize on them. In this sense, defeatism is a practical handicap, whereas striving for victory necessarily depends upon the ability to adapt to a shifting landscape.

From The Weekly Standard

The Patton of Counterinsurgency

With a sequence of brilliant offensives, Raymond Odierno adapted the Petraeus doctrine into a successful operational art.

by Frederick W. Kagan and Kimberly Kagan

03/10/2008, Volume 013, Issue 25

Full article Kagan & Kagan Weekly Standard

Excerpts:

Great commanders often come in pairs: Eisenhower and Patton, Grant and Sherman, Napoleon and Davout, Marlborough and Eugene, Caesar and Labienus. Generals David Petraeus and Raymond Odierno can now be added to the list.

It's natural to assume that successful pairs of commanders complement each other's personalities (the diplomatic Eisenhower and the hard-charging Patton, for example) or that the junior partner is merely executing the vision of the other (Sherman seen as acting on Grant's orders).

In reality, the task of planning and conducting large-scale military operations is too great for any single commander, no matter how talented his staff. The subordinate in every successful command pair has played a key role in designing and implementing the campaign plan.

History does not always justly appreciate such contributions. The role that Davout played in shaping operational plans for Napoleon is a matter for specialists.

General Odierno deserves better. He played an absolutely essential role in designing and executing the successful counterinsurgency operations in Iraq. His contributions to securing Iraq offer many important lessons for fighting the larger war on terror.

As he and his team return to Fort Hood, Texas, it is important not only to commemorate their achievement, but also to understand it.

From: Investors Business Daily

By Charles Krauthammer

What Will Critics Of Iraq Say Now That Reconciliation Is Under Way?

Posted February 21, 2008 4:30 PM PT

Full article To Charles Krauthammer Investors Business Daily

Excerpts:

"No one can spend some 10 days visiting the battlefields in Iraq without seeing major progress in every area. ... If the U.S. provides sustained support to the Iraqi government — in security, governance and development — there is now a very real chance that Iraq will emerge as a secure and stable state."

—Anthony Cordesman, "The Situation in Iraq: A Briefing From the Battlefield," Feb. 13, 2008

This from a man who was a severe critic of the postwar occupation of Iraq and who, as author Peter Wehner points out, is no wide-eyed optimist. In fact, in May 2006, Cordesman wrote that "no one can argue that the prospects for stability in Iraq are good."

Now, however, there is simply no denying the remarkable improvements in Iraq since the surge began a year ago.

From Breitbart.com

Full article Breitbart

Excerpts:

The Iraqi interior ministry lauded its achievements over the past year on Saturday, saying that 75 percent of Al-Qaeda's networks in the country had been destroyed in 12 months.

Ministry spokesman Abdul Karim Khalaf also outlined sharp falls in the numbers of assassinations, kidnappings and death squad murders.

He told a news conference that increased patrols along the borders with Saudi Arabia and Syria had slowed infiltration by militants and played a key role in Iraq's improved security situation.

###

Shushing Victory In Afghanistan

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Thursday, December 13, 2007 4:20 PM PT

Full article Investors Business Daily

Excerpts

War On Terror: Coalition forces captured the Taliban's biggest stronghold on Tuesday in a major military victory. Funny, isn't it, how the good guys winning doesn't make banner front-page headlines?

Related Topics: Middle East & North Africa | Global War On Terror

Musa Qala was the only town in the strategically vital Helmand province under Taliban control. The enemy had seized it in February after the collapse of a local truce between the British military and Afghan elders. But this week Afghan and NATO-led troops changed that by killing, wounding or capturing hundreds of Taliban fighters, including several commanders, in retaking the town.

On Pearl Harbor Day, Dec. 7, U.S. infantry were participating in one of the biggest air assaults in Afghanistan since the toppling of the Taliban government a few weeks after 9/11. So many of the enemy were killed that Afghan Defense Ministry spokesman Zahir Azimi told reporters, "We are still busy collecting dead bodies from Musa Qala." Azimi also said an important Taliban meeting in the mountains of Sangin and Musa Qala district was also bombed, resulting in many casualties.

Far from just an important Taliban command post, Musa Qala was also a training base for both Afghan and foreign Islamist militants. Azimi has said hundreds of foreign terrorists had gathered there. That makes this week's victory a big win in the global war on terror.

Democrats in the House of Representatives are reporting a change in districts across the country:

Voters are turning their attention away from the Iraq war.

Rep. Jim Cooper, a moderate Democrat from Tennessee, said virtually no one asked about the war during his Thanksgiving recess.

Rep. Michael E. Capuano, an anti-war Democrat from Massachusetts, said about three out of dozens of callers on a town hall teleconference asked about Iraq.

Mr. Capuano is from a highly Democratic district

First-term Rep. Nancy Boyda (D-Kan.) said illegal immigration concerns about the economy have become bigger concerns of her constituents.

Ms. Boyda is somewhat famous for her success so far of getting money from American taxpayers to build a "PRISON MUSEUM" in her home district.

House Majority Leader Steny H. Hoyer (D-Md.) agreed that "voters are certainly talking less about the war." “People are not as engaged daily with the reality of Iraq,”

One of Democrats' most vocal war critics, Rep. John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), returned from a trip to Iraq and told reporters Thursday that “the surge is working.”

On Friday, Murtha, chairman of the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, clarified his remarks. The surge, he said, “has created a window of opportunity for the Iraqi government,’’ which he added has “failed to capitalize on the political and diplomatic steps that the surge was designed to provide.”

Rep. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), who traveled to Iraq with Murtha over the Thanksgiving break, also agrees the surge is working.

“There is a sense of normalcy you didn’t see before. In that sense, the surge is being successful,” Dicks said in an interview with the Seattle Times.

The shift in voter intensity about Iraq, has also captured in some polls.

Those polls show a big difference in views on the war since this past summer.

An increasing number says the U.S. war effort is going well,

A larger percentage also believes the United States is making progress in reducing the number of Iraqi casualties, defeating the insurgents and preventing a civil war in Iraq.

About half of the public (48%) believes the U.S. military effort in Iraq is going very well or fairly well. Opinions regarding the overall situation in Iraq have been improving steadily since the summer.

In the early part of the summer (June) a mere one third of Americans (34%) said things were going well in Iraq.

The latest poll by the Pew Research Center among 1,399 adults, finds that improved public perceptions of Iraq are evident when it comes to security-related issues.

The number of Americans has doubled of among those who say that the United States is making progress in reducing the number of civilian casualties in Iraq.

According to the poll Americans say that progress has been achieved in preventing terrorists from establishing bases in Iraq and that the U.S. is has made gains militarily in defeating the insurgents.

IRAQ: WHAT WENT RIGHT

COURAGE, SKILL, LUCK AND EXHAUSTION

Ralph Peters writing in the New York Post gives five major reasons for the favorable direction in Iraq:

We didn't quit: Even as some of us began to suspect that Iraqi society was hopelessly sick, our troops stood to and did their duty bravely. The tenacity of our soldiers and Marines in the face of mortal enemies in Iraq and blithe traitors at home is the No. 1 reason why Iraq has turned around.

Without their valor and sacrifice, nothing else would've mattered. Key leaders were courageous, too - men such as now-Lt. Gen. Ray Odierno. Big Ray was pilloried in our media for being too warlike, too aggressive and just too damned tough on our enemies.

Well, the Ray Odiernos, not the hearts-and-minds crowd, held the line against evil. Only by hammering our enemies year after year were we able to convince them that we couldn't - and wouldn't - be beaten. If the press wronged any single man or woman in uniform, it was Odierno - thank God he was promoted and stayed in the fight.

The surge: While the increase in troop numbers was important, allowing us to consolidate gains in neighborhoods we'd rid of terrorists and insurgents, the psychological effect of the surge was crucial.

Pre-surge, our enemies were convinced they were winning - they monitored our media, which assured them that America would quit. Sorry, Muqtada - that's what you get for believing The New York Times.

The message sent by the surge was that we not only wouldn't quit, but also were upping the ante. It stunned our enemies - while giving Sunni Arabs disenchanted with al Qaeda the confidence to flip to our side without fear of abandonment.

Fanatical enemies: We lucked out when al Qaeda declared Iraq the central front in its war against civilization. Our monstrous foes alienated their local allies so utterly that al Qaeda in Iraq is now largely a spent force - the hunted, not the hunters. The terrorists have suffered a strategic humiliation.

Religious fanatics always overdo their savagery - but you can't predict the alienation time-line. Al Qaeda's blood-thirst accelerated the process, helping us immensely.

The Iraqis are sick of bloodshed and destruction: This is the least-recognized factor - but it's critical. We still don't fully understand the mechanics of black-to-white mood shifts in populations, but such transitions determine strategic outcomes.

What we do know is that, when tyrannical regimes collapse in artificial states such as Iraq (or the former Yugoslavia), a lot of pent-up grudges play out violently. People seem to need to get suppressed hatreds out of their systems.

The peace-through-exhaustion mood swing happened abruptly in Iraq. Suddenly, the people have had their fill of gunmen and gangsters who claim to be their defenders. Heads-down passivity has morphed into active resistance to the terrorists and militias.

We're all sober now, Americans and Iraqis. And peace is built on sobriety, not passion.

As Thanksgiving approaches, consider a vignette from Baghdad:

As part of its campaign to eliminate Iraq's Christian communities, al Qaeda in 2004 bombed St. John's Christian church in Doura, in the city's southern badlands. By last spring, local services had stopped completely.

Our Army's 2nd Battalion of the 12th Infantry stepped up. Under Lt. Col. Stephen Michael (a Newark native), our soldiers methodically cleaned up Doura - no easy or painless task - and aided the reconstruction of the church.

Last week, a grateful congregation returned for a service that was, literally, a resurrection. Fifteen local Muslim sheikhs attended the Mass to support their Christian neighbors. Could there be a more hopeful symbol?

Those long-suffering Iraqi Christians will celebrate Christmas in their neighborhood church this year. "Peace on earth" will mean more to them than mere words in a carol.

As for the grunts of 2-12 Infantry who made it all possible, their motto is "Ducti Amore Patria," or "Having been led by love of country."

On Thanksgiving Day, be thankful for such men.

Ralph Peters' latest book is "Wars of Blood and Faith."

At the end of the Korean War-1953-Korea was a country stricken with severe poverty.

Today, tiny South Korea is the 13th largest economy in the world.

Quite conceivably, we could see the same results in in Iraq from the present war.

If that were to become the case, it would likely hamper the Islamist-Jihad movement to a serious degree.

Harry S. Truman's ratings as president were down in the low 20's at the time of the Korean War.

During that time Mr. Truman has become a highly rated and highly respected president.

Could history repeat itself.

President Bush has given us a great economy, even though those on the left are in serious denial.

A study released by the Treasury Department covering over 97,000 tax returns from the years 1996 and 2005 has destroyed the phony class warfare argument of the phony phrase income inequality.

Besides the massive deception by the Left and the Mainstream Media about realities the term itself is a deception. It should be called either EDUCATION INEQUALITY or RESPONSIBILITY INEQUALITY, maybe even PERSISTENCE INEQUALITY.

Jack Kelly writing in th Pittsburgh Post Gazette Says Iraq is a quagmire however the quagmire if for al-Queda.

Excerpts below:

...Jihadis, money and weapons were poured into Iraq. All for naught. Al-Qaeda has been driven from every neighborhood in Baghdad,

Maj. Gen. Joseph Fil, the U.S. commander there, said Nov. 7. This follows the expulsion of al-Qaeda from two previous "capitals" of its Islamic Republic of Iraq, Ramadi and Baquba.

Al-Qaeda is evacuating populated areas and is trying to establish hideouts in the Hamrin mountains in northern Iraq, with U.S. and Iraqi security forces, and former insurgent allies who have turned on them, in hot pursuit.

Forty-five al-Qaeda leaders were killed or captured in October alone.

Al-Qaeda's support in the Muslim world has plummeted, partly because of the terror group's lack of success in Iraq, more because al-Qaeda's attacks have mostly killed Muslim civilians.

"Iraq has proved to be the graveyard, not just of many al-Qaida operatives, but of the organization's reputation as a defender of Islam," said StrategyPage.

Canadian columnist David Warren speculated some years ago that enticing al-Qaeda to fight there was one of the reasons why President Bush decided to invade Iraq.

The administration has made so many egregious mistakes that I doubt the "flypaper" strategy was deliberate. But it has worked out that way. It may have been a mistake for the United States to go to war in Iraq. But it's pretty clear now it was a blunder for al-Qaeda to have done so.

You may not be aware of the calamities that have befallen al-Qaeda, because our news media have paid scant attention to them.

Full Article Jack Kelly Pittsburgh Post Gazette

His quote:

"American forces have routed Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, the Iraqi militant network, from every neighborhood in Baghdad a top American General said today, allowing American troops involved in the 'surge' to depart as planned."

###

It is now being reported by the Iraqi government that 46,030 Iraqi refugees have crossed back over the borders to return home. The figures are for the month of October.

The reports suggest that improved safety in Iraq is the reason.

###

O1 November 2007

Iraqi Islamic Party: “Al Qaeda is Defeated”

Could The Sheik Be Correct.

Below is an excerpt of the opinion and statement of Sheik Omar Jabouri

“Al Qaeda in Iraq is defeated,” according to Sheik Omar Jabouri, spokesman for the Iraqi Islamic Party and a member of the widespread and influential Jabouri Tribe. Speaking through an interpreter at a 31 October meeting at the Iraqi Islamic Party headquarters in downtown Baghdad, Sheik Omar said that al Qaeda had been “defeated mentally, and therefore is defeated physically,” referring to how clear it has become that the terrorist group’s tactics have backfired. Operatives who could once disappear back into the crowd after committing an increasingly atrocious attack no longer find safe haven among the Iraqis who live in the southern part of Baghdad. They are being hunted down and killed. Or, if they are lucky, captured by Americans...

Do you know any former prisoners of war (POW) or their family members? If so, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) needs your help.

VA is once again reaching out to former prisoners of war not currently using VA benefits and services, urging them to contact the Department to find out if they are eligible for health care, disability compensation and other services.

Learn More

To learn of some positives in Iraq, the links below are excellent sources:

Below are several paragraphs from a New York Daily News Article by war correspondent Michael Yon. For the complete article click on the link immediately above.

Clearly, not every terrorist in Iraq is Al Qaeda, but it is Al Qaeda that has been intentionally, openly, brazenly trying to stoke a civil war. As Al Qaeda is now being chased out of regions it once held without serious challenge, their tactics are tinged with desperation.

This may be the greatest miscalculation they've made in their otherwise sophisticated battle for the hearts and minds of locals, and it is one we must exploit.

In fact, some Sunni insurgents who formerly were allies of Al Qaeda have turned on them simply because Al Qaeda has proven it will murder anyone — and in the most horrible ways. One of these groups is called the 1920 Revolution Brigade, which turned on Al Qaeda and joined forces with the U.S.

Military Expert Says Surge is Working-Writes Very Convincing Article

See Surge in Iraq Is Working

On July 24, 2007 The 2007 Pew Global Attitudes survey was released.

That report revealed the following:

Support for bombings and terror tactics has dropped in seven of eight countries according to AP.

In Lebanon, Muslims who believe suicide bombings are justified some or all of the time fell from 79 percent in 2002 to 34 percent.

In Pakistan, the percentage dropped from 41 to 9 percent. Jordanian Muslims, 56 percent had confidence in Osama bin Laden as a world leader in 2003; the number has dropped to 20 percent.

None of the major networks reported this story.

The Washington Post did not cover it and the New York Timesmade it an incidental part of another story.

They hate George Bush and they're afraid he might get some credit.

A great display of patriotism took place on the Fourth of July.

Five-Hundred fifty eight troops re-enlisted in the military, and another one hundred sixty one were naturalized as American citizens.

In what was described as a "stirring ceremony" General David Petraeus, the top military official in Iraq, presided, over this and the celebration of the nation's 231st birthday.

Most of those who reenlisted on Independence Day, were serving on a second or third deployment to a combat zone.

Terrorists killed Per Month In 2007---650

Americans killed per month in combat---37

Source: Defense Department

These numbers give us a ratio of 18 terrorists to 1 American killed.

Since the war began, we've lost about 70 troops a month. This compares with 526 a month in Vietnam, more than 900 a month in Korea and 6,639 a month during World War II.

Consistent with the charts shown below for daily, quarterly and yearly deaths, the monthly figures show that we have lost on a monthly basis, approximately 70 troops, compared to 526 a month in Vietnam, and more than 900 a month in Korea .

In World War II, we lost more than 6600 a month.

_______________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________________________

Recently, U.S. Army Maj. General William B. Caldwell IV, Multi-National Forces in Iraq-spokesman currently stationed in Baghdad, published an article titled:

The General started out with the words

__________________________________________________________________

“lets put the bad news up front”, which were: Extremist elements in Iraq are vying for political and economic power and are seeking to take advantage of this delicate stage of transition in Iraq's history.

Sunni and Shia extremists are using brutal and provocative tactics against one another. Baghdad is the center of gravity for this increasingly sectarian conflict.

There are also foreign terrorists infiltrating the borders, renegade death squads, an insurgency and foreign governments who seek to exert influence on Iraqi politics.

This, however, is only part of Iraq's present story. The violence belies the gradual but remarkable transformation this nation is experiencing.”

The general than lists these positives:

Today, Iraqis are standing up in military and police forces that number more than 300,000, closing rapidly on the goal of 325,000 trained and equipped force members.

Three years ago security forces were virtually non-existent.Quality and quantity are improving. Forces that formerly fled battles are now performing impressively.

Iraqi Special forces have captured and detained 1320 insurgents in hundreds of operations in recent months including the capture of senior leaders and a high number of “most wanted.”

In September the Iraqi forces safeguarded an Iraqi pilgrimage of 4 million people, celebrating a Shiite holy day.

Recently command of the Iraqi military was turned over to the Prime Minister, from Coalition Forces.Security seems destined to improve with political and economic progress.

Under Saddam Hussein, government existed for the benefit of Hussein and his Sunni followers. Today, Iraqis are sharing power and resources.

General Caldwell believes “local governments — provinces, districts or neighborhoods — are beginning to take responsibility for their citizens.

The government must work to heal the wounds of this fractured society by getting all factions to reconcile”.

This past weekend, at a meeting in Baghdad, hundreds of civil society representatives renounced violence as part of a national reconciliation and dialogue plan.

Meetings with neighbors and European countries have recently taken place, targeting help for Iraq’s economy.

General Caldwell Concludes with the following encouraging statement:

“Iraq's new unity government is moving forward and will continue grappling with tough political challenges, such as how to balance power between central and regional governments (federalism) and how to divvy up the country's oil revenues.

But Iraqis have succeeded in setting a road map for resolving these essential issues. We must maintain the patience to allow their critical efforts to come to fruition.”

We know the violence between Shia and Sunni is still a serious threat to success, the outcome cannot be taken for granted, but World War II had many, many failures before the tide turned.

Although events have proven that we cannot get the Democratic Party to get back on the side of America and support winning the war in Iraq and dealing a major blow to the terrorists-as reported by the recent National Intelligence Estimate-we can throw strong support to the war effort by supporting the administration and electing to Congress, only those with the guts to win the war-Democrat or Republican and to put the safety of America above the insatiable desire to recapture the lost power of 1994, for all but a handful of Democrats.

Iraq to Editorials