Decision ‘08

The Race Is On


Washington Post Editorial Board: Critics of Petraeus Were Wrong

I’ve had an undisguised admiration for the Washington Post editorial board for quite some time now.  There is no doubt that the Post leans left, as does the NY Times, but unlike the Times, the Post is not so blinded by partisanship that it cannot see any good news that doesn’t fit its political agenda.  Today’s editorial is a classic example, standing in stark contrast to the defeatism that pervades liberal Manhattan:

… [S]ome 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.

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.

When I said essentially the same thing a few days ago, and called for more realism in the Iraq debate, making the quite obvious point that we are NOT withdrawing our troops now, or anytime soon, and would be fools to do so when we are finally getting to where we should have been a couple of years ago, one long-time (ex?)reader accused me of being an accomplice to murder.  I guess the Post editorial board is, too…

Meanwhile, in the fantasy world of the Times, where we are losing thousands of troops (sorry - boys who don’t know better - never forget that in the progressive view soldiers are victims, forced into battle by evil conservatives, rather than volunteering for service) every day, seemingly, in an unbelievable orgy of violence, we have Frank Rich accusing supporters of the administration, Iraq war, and GWOT of being enablers of modern-day Nazism.

Hmmm…dang, I wish I had a subscription to the New York Times, just so I could cancel it!…

2 Responses to “Washington Post Editorial Board: Critics of Petraeus Were Wrong”

  1. 1 Neocon News » Numbers support Petraeus, Democrats feign(?) illiteracy Says:

    […] have stung … | Gateway Pundit: MORE GOOD NEWS… Casualties Continue to Drop in Iraq | Decision ‘08 » Washington Post Editorial Board: Critics of Petraeus Were Wrong | Back Talk: Violence in Iraq in Perspective | Positive News from Iraq: IGNORE THIS POST!!!1!! […]

  2. 2 CrawlinKingSnake Says:

    The tumbleweed speaks volumes on this post.

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>


Comments Live Preview:


Contact Me

Weblog_finalist150








Hosted by: Blogs About Hosting


Powered by WordPress Get Firefox

Show me the love!



Code Validations
Valid W3C XHTML 1.0 Transitional Valid W3C CSS
Valid RSS 2.0 Valid Atom 0.3