Bush Fulfilling Promise About Iraq; Democrats Denial "Sureal"

Proving Democrats (most specifically Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden and moveon.org) dead wrong, the fact about progress in Iraq is undeniable even by those still denying it....

Research professor Engram (registered Democrat) at the BackTalk Blog has been tracking the violence and success and near disasters in Iraq since shortly after the beginning of the war in great detail with great accuracy.
Engrams latest post is a demonstration of just how well things are going in Iraq... no civil war and the lowest death count since the beginning of the war along with a vibrant economy with more and more of the country being turned over to Iraqi's as we draw down our troop numbers JUST AS President GEORGE W BUSH promised.

Iraq is rapidly becoming that democratic friend and ally to the war on terror capable of defending itself with minimal US assistance.... JUST AS President GEORGE W BUSH promised.

Like it or not, the moveon.org's and the Dr. Payne's and dochoc's of the world WERE WRONG when they said we could not win in Iraq, wrong when they said we were the problem in Iraq and not the solution and wrong when they said we were in a civil war in Iraq... wrong, wrong and wrong again.

I challenge anti-war liberals to look at Dr. Engram's reports, data and analysis beginning with his latest post...

Casualties in Iraq, October 2008

The story of casualties in Iraq is now almost too amazing to believe, but it is a story that is completely misunderstood by the man who is likely to be elected as the next president of the United States. Barack Obama not only misunderstands Iraq (e.g., he thought that the violence reflected a civil war that was mostly unrelated to al Qaeda), he can barely stand to acknowledge the unimaginable drop in violence that has occurred over the last year.

Although Obama is not very interested in America's victory in Iraq, you should be. Take a look at my monthly annotated chart of civilian casualties, which includes figures for the just completed month of October (the source of data and essential corrections are described here):




As always, the dark purple bars represent the months associated with George Bush's troop surge, and the black bar represents the month in which al Qaeda finally succeeded in its quest to ignite out-of-control sectarian violence by bombing the Golden Mosque. For the October casualty figure, I removed casualties from two mass graves that were recently discovered because both involved deaths that occurred several years ago (not in October).

If you are on the left, you probably believed that casualties were not declining when General Petraeus testified that they were back in September of 2007. You also probably believed that the surge would never be able to reduce casualties in Iraq. That's what Obama thought (and, admittedly, so did I). Moreover, like Obama (but unlike me), you probably thought that it would be just a grand idea to withdraw our troops at the very height of sectarian violence, despite the fact that the catastrophic consequences of our surrender were so obvious that even the liberal editors of the New York Times could not deny them:

The Road Home

July 8, 2007

It is time for the United States to leave Iraq, without any more delay than the Pentagon needs to organize an orderly exit.
...
Whatever his cause was, it is lost.
...
Americans must be clear that Iraq, and the region around it, could be even bloodier and more chaotic after Americans leave. There could be reprisals against those who worked with American forces, further ethnic cleansing, even genocide. Potentially destabilizing refugee flows could hit Jordan and Syria. Iran and Turkey could be tempted to make power grabs. Perhaps most important, the invasion has created a new stronghold from which terrorist activity could proliferate.

Barack Obama not only favored the withdrawal of US forces, which was bad enough, he actually introduced a troop withdrawal bill that was designed to prevent the troop surge from ever happening. That was a major test of the man's judgment, and any reasonable person would have to give him a grade of F. Even worse, not only did he exhibit profoundly impaired judgment, he did not learn from (or even so much as acknowledge) his mistake. Instead, he breezily asserts that we don't know what would have happened had we surrendered at the height of al Qaeda-induced sectarian violence. That's like saying we don't really know what would happen if a surgeon just walked away from the operating table in the middle of a heart transplant operation that was going very badly. We do know what would happen to the patient, and anyone who suggests otherwise would not be a prime candidate for a physician's license. Yet Barack Obama is poised to become our next commander-in-chief (despite his poor judgment and despite the fact that he appears to have learned nothing from his misguided actions).

Military casualties in Iraq show the same amazing trends that are evident in the civilian casualty figures:

On Wednesday, we will probably wake up to find that our country will be run for the next 4 years by Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi. What they have in common, as my chart helps to illustrate, is colossally impaired judgment on the issue of national security, along with an eagerness to accept America's defeat at the hands of al Qaeda in Iraq. Their impaired judgment is directly traceable to the fact that they were completely uninterested in the details about what was happening in Iraq (as I have documented relentlessly on my blog over the last couple of years). What happened to their intellectual curiosity? To them, George Bush's folly in Iraq caused an uncontrollable civil war, and that's all you really needed to know. Throughout the entire troop-surge debate, our future liberal leaders steadfastly maintained what I called an "eerie code of silence" about the critical role played by al Qaeda's foreign leaders and incredibly lethal foreign suicide bombers in the so-called "civil war." They don't seem to know that Osama bin Laden "took his eye off the ball" in Afghanistan and sent his jihadists to evict American forces from Iraq instead. Yet, to this very day, Obama, Reid and Pelosi won't even talk about it.
It's surreal."