WaPo: Petraeus’s Critics Were “Simply Wrong”

From a begrudging Washington Post:

Better Numbers

The evidence of a drop in violence in Iraq is becoming hard to dispute.

Sunday, October 14, 2007; B06

NEWS COVERAGE and debate about Iraq during the past couple of weeks have centered on the alleged abuses of private security firms like Blackwater USA. Getting such firms into a legal regime is vital, as we’ve said. But meanwhile, some seemingly important facts about the main subject of discussion last month — whether there has been a decrease in violence in Iraq — have gotten relatively little attention. A congressional study and several news stories in September questioned reports by the U.S. military that casualties were down. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), challenging the testimony of Gen. David H. Petraeus, asserted that “civilian deaths have risen” during this year’s surge of American forces.

A month later, there isn’t much room for such debate, at least about the latest figures. In September, Iraqi civilian deaths were down 52 percent from August and 77 percent from September 2006, according to the Web site icasualties.org. The Iraqi Health Ministry and the Associated Press reported similar results. U.S. soldiers killed in action numbered 43 — down 43 percent from August and 64 percent from May, which had the highest monthly figure so far this year. The American combat death total was the lowest since July 2006 and was one of the five lowest monthly counts since the insurgency in Iraq took off in April 2004.

During the first 12 days of October the death rates of Iraqis and Americans fell still further. So far during the Muslim month of Ramadan, which began Sept. 13 and ends this weekend, 36 U.S. soldiers have been reported as killed in hostile actions. That is remarkable given that the surge has deployed more American troops in more dangerous places and that in the past al-Qaeda has staged major offensives during Ramadan. Last year, at least 97 American troops died in combat during Ramadan. Al-Qaeda tried to step up attacks this year, U.S. commanders say — so far, with stunningly little success.

The trend could change quickly and tragically, of course. Casualties have dropped in the past for a few weeks only to spike again. There are, however, plausible reasons for a decrease in violence. Sunni tribes in Anbar province that once fueled the insurgency have switched sides and declared war on al-Qaeda. The radical Shiite leader Moqtada al-Sadr ordered a cease-fire last month by his Mahdi Army. Lt. Gen. Raymond T. Odierno, the top day-to-day commander in Iraq, says al-Qaeda’s sanctuaries have been reduced 60 to 70 percent by the surge.

This doesn’t necessarily mean the war is being won. U.S. military commanders have said that no reduction in violence will be sustainable unless Iraqis reach political solutions — and there has been little progress on that front. Nevertheless, it’s looking more and more as though those in and outside of Congress who last month were assailing Gen. Petraeus’s credibility and insisting that there was no letup in Iraq’s bloodshed were — to put it simply — wrong.

Mind you, this is the Washington Post saying that even the smartest woman in the world was “simply – wrong.”

That is simply amazing.

Related Articles:

• Watch Bill Clinton Defend The "Betray Us" Ad
• Dems Won't Promise US Out Of Iraq By 2013
• Hillary Pretends She Voted Against MoveOn Ad
• Democrats Propose A New "Slow Bleed" Tactic
• Giuliani Runs (NYT Discounted) Anti-Hillary Ad
• Shocker: Washington Post Endorses Bush Plan
• MoveOn's Despicable "General Betray Us" Ad
• Shocker: Congress Report Says Surge Failed
• Reuters: New Iraqi Political Deal Won't Work
• WP: Dems Must Recognize Surge Success
• Reuters: Democrats Better Back Off On Iraq
• Guardian: Iraq Violence Casts Doubt On 'Surge'
• Dems Demand "Monumental" Iraq Progress
• NY Times Op-Ed: We Just Might Win In Iraq
• Nancy Pelosi Announces: "Defeat Is At Hand"