Addendum:  In the post below I note the war in Iraq is America’s war – not Bush’s war.  I reminded folks that Congress approved the action overwhelmingly (by much larger margins than Gulf War I) and Bush was reelected in a vote of confidence from Americans themselves.  I failed to note Congress has for each year, on completely stand-alone votes, authorized the funding of the war effort.  Obama needs to face some hard facts, like all of us.  The war in Iraq is America’s war.  America needs to discuss on how we want to finish the job we started. – end addendum.

Well, now that we seem to be heading towards an Obama-McCain showdown this fall Iraq is the largest issue looming out there (followed close behind by an nuclear armed Iran). Obama is still foolishly committed to his surrender at all cost position on the war – even while we are on a clear path to victory before he even would take the oath of office.  I heard someone on AM radio say last night (probably Hannity, which is all I could get while I dodged tornados around the DC beltway) that the terrorist would not dare attack America this year, or else they would get the wrong President (McCain).

I have thought this way for years, but the terrorists – with the lust for blood – have continued to make the wrong decisions.  Which is why America elected George Bush for a second term, even after he invaded Iraq (and let’s make no mistake about it, this is not Bush’s war it is America’s war and we are all responsible – get over it).   But if this is true, if terrorists have learned the lesson, not to attack America or else there will be a terrible price, then we truly are on the rode to victory.  Because that is the meaning behind the concept of peace through strength.  You gain peace in your lives because every thug and animal out there knows better than to mess with you.  If we have finally reached that point – and have allied democracies in Iraq and Afghanistan and Pakistan as well – it is time to pop the champaign!

Anyway, here are more signs that victory is going to beat the next President into office.  First a positive report on the violence levels in Iraq:

The “surge” of American troops in Iraq last year winds to a close next month when the last two surge brigades redeploy home.

Security conditions in the Iraq they are leaving are much improved over those the extra troops encountered when they arrived, say analysts and defense officials, many of whom are confident that trend will continue even without the extra US troops.

The departure of the two brigades comes as the number of American casualties is at a new low. Of the heavy fighting that continues in Iraq, in places like Basra and the Baghdad suburb of Sadr City, much is now being led by the Iraqis themselves. As a result, the number of US casualties last month fell to 19, a number not seen since February 2004, according to icasualties.org.

The toll among Iraqi security forces has also fallen, from 980 in March to 506 in May.

“The conditions in Baghdad are changing,” says Maj. Gen. Jeffrey Hammond, the American leading the Bagdad command. “There’s no place for those terrorists and criminals. The people are fed up with them. They’re tired of the violence and destruction. They vote to move on.”

They Move On.  The terrorists made huge mistakes by slaughtering their fellow Muslims, creating a violent backlash in the Iraqi Muslim Street which spelled the end of al-Qaeda in Iraq, and the Mahdi Militia in Iraq. They are defeated, and move on.  Wonder if the liberal left will be able to accept their mistaken choice to surrender to Bin Laden, to make him a world hero because he made America blink and back away?  For all the calls to Bush to accept his mistakes, those who predicted defeat in Iraq better lead the way by example and admit theirs.  They don’t have, of course.  They can go down in history along side Neville Chamberlain and history’s other notorious appeasers who made (or in this case almost made) historic blunders.

Writing in the WSJ Foud Ajami reminded America of Ambassador Ryan Cockers important words on Iraq, which are the essence of the debate in 2008:

Of all that has been written about the play of things in Iraq, nothing that I have seen approximates the truth of what our ambassador to Baghdad, Ryan Crocker, recently said of this war: “In the end, how we leave and what we leave behind will be more important than how we came.”

While Obama can complain about Bush’s responsibility in leading us into Iraq (again, under Congressional approval and his own mandate in his reelection), the truth is Obama wants to be responsible for how we will leave Iraq.  And he better face up to that right now.  If Americans felt duped by Bush, then they better not let Obama pull another sleight of hand on them by promising a quick and easy retreat!  There was no easy victory waiting for us in Iraq – many of us who even now support the war were never so naive.  We knew there could be scenarios where that happened, but we new other scenarios to victory looked like what we have seen over the past 5 years.  And we knew there could be real defeat, as now only in the imagination of the far left.

But Obama (and Clinton) promise neat and clean ends by hasty withdrawals, which are simply lies to be fed to the gullible.  America needs to stop hoping for change and start learning and understanding the implications of the proposed changes.   There are no quick fixes, as Vietnam demonstrated with millions of people massacred after we departed that war.  But this war is not Vietnam – the enemies have been vanquished. There are no Northern Iraqis fighting the Southern Iraqis – all Iraqis are joined in a democratic government and united in destroying the terrorist in their midst.  Geez, even Andrew Sullivan has turned mostly bullish on the Iraq situation again.

So how will Obama leave Iraq – that is a question which America deserves hard, well thought out and researched answers to.  As the article notes, what is being passed in the media as a serious debate is a joke:

It is odd, then, that critics have launched a new attack on the origins of the war at precisely the time a new order in Iraq is taking hold. But American liberal opinion is obsessive today. Scott McClellan can’t be accused of strategic thinking, but he has been anointed a peer of Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft. A witness and a presumed insider – a “Texas loyalist” – has “flipped.”

…

The nation was gripped by legitimate concern over gathering dangers in the aftermath of 9/11. Kabul and the war against the Taliban had not sufficed, for those were Arabs who struck America on 9/11. A war of deterrence had to be waged against Arab radicalism, and Saddam Hussein had drawn the short straw. He had not ducked, he had not scurried for cover. He openly mocked America’s grief, taunted its power.

We don’t need to overwork the stereotype that Arabs understand and respond to the logic of force, but this is a region sensitive to the wind, and to the will of outside powers. Before America struck into Iraq, a mere 18 months after 9/11, there had been glee in the Arab world, a sense that America had gotten its comeuppance. There were regimes hunkering down, feigning friendship with America while aiding and abetting the forces of terror.

Now, there are real allies, real efforts to fight terrorism.  And a real rejection of the romantic notion of Jihad – now that Muslims have seen what Jihad with the West means up close and personal.  And for the most part, with the few bad-apple exceptions you find in all large human endeavors, we did not retaliate against the Muslim Street.  In fact, to many Iraqis and Afghanis America liberated them from their own bad choice to subjugate themselves to the jackboot of Islamo-Fascim.  

This is the impression of Bin Laden’s dream Caliphate I always have in my mind from their brief time controlling much of the Sunni areas of Iraq:

“AQI is both feared and hated,” Capt Broekhuizen said, referring to Al Qaeda in Iraq. “They’ve been running a brutal terror campaign. No city leaders are left here who will take a leadership role.” Marines from Golf Company said they recently fished two bodies out of the local river: a man had been decapitated, and his 4-year old tied to his leg before both were thrown into the river and the little boy drowned. The killings were a product of Al Qaeda terror.

This act is attached to the image of Bin Laden as much as his beard and hawk-nose in my mind.  It is right up there with the Holocaust inflicted by the Nazis.  It is a horrible reminder of how sick and brutal some people can be.  To take a innocent four year old and not only snuff out his life, but to so make him watch his father be decapitated and then drown him with his father’s body is an act of such depravity I am not surprised most Americans (and Muslims) could not imagine the act.

But this is Bin Laden’s dream.  This is what he and his followers want to inflict on America.   Anyone denying this better explain how these thugs would treat infidel Americans any better than their fellow Muslims.  So now that we have this scourge on the run, Obama needs to explain why we would let up, and give them free reign to decapitate more fathers and mothers and tie more four year old boys and girls to their bodies to drown the children?  Why are we going to surrender at all costs Obama?

Michael Yon, the independent journalist most familiar with Iraq, has an open invitation to all Senators running for President, to come see Iraq for themselves so they can make informed decisions:

One of the biggest problems with the Iraq War is that politics has frequently triumphed over truth.  For instance, we went into Iraq with shoddy intelligence (at best), no reconstruction plan, and perhaps half as many troops as were required.  We refused to admit that an insurgency was growing, until the country collapsed into anarchy and civil war.  Now the truth is that Iraq is showing real progress on many fronts:  Al Qaeda is being defeated and violence is down and continuing to decrease.  As a result, the militias have lost their reason for existence and are getting beaten back or co-opted.  Shia, Sunni and Kurds are coming together — although with various stresses — under the national government.  If progress continues at this rate, it is very possible that before 2008 is out, we can finally say “the war has ended.”  Yes, likely there still will be some American casualties, but if the violence continues to drop and the Iraqi government consolidates its gains, we will be able, in good conscience, to begin bringing more of our people home.  I will be paying very close attention to the words of Lieutenant General Raymond Odierno, who is replacing General Petraeus as the overall commander in Iraq.

Whatever we do in Iraq from here forward, we must strive to make better decisions than those made between 2003 and 2006.  And one way to achieve that is by making certain that our civilian leaders are fully informed.  All three candidates for President are extremely intelligent, but that doesn’t mean that all three are tracking the truth on the ground in Iraq.  Anyone who wants to be President of the United States needs to see Iraq without the distorting lenses of the media or partisan politics.  I would be honored to visit Iraq with Senator Obama, Senator Clinton, Senator McCain or any of their Senate colleagues.

Michael Yon braved the war zone on his own nickel to report the truth of Iraq to America.  He pulled no punches – he was very negative on the beginning phases, which were mishandled.  Senator Obama cannot expect to walk into the Oval Office without understanding the core issue of our time – how to finish succeeding in Iraq.  Senator, you can blame Bush or you can finish the job he started.  You can’t do both (no one will believe your intentions to finish the work right).