Don't Mythologize "The Surge"

Brandon Friedman at The Daily Kos has a great post today reconstructing the timeline for the supposed success of “the surge” dating back to last August 31st, at which time Muqtada al-Sadr announced that he had ordered his Madhi Army to suspend offensive operations after 50 Muslim pilgrims were slaughtered in Karbala. Friedman explains that that is the real reason for the decrease in casualties as opposed to anything Bushco has done.

And even if the preznit and the neocons were responsible, merely decreasing the slaughter is no reason to consider the surge a success. My understanding has always been that the point of the surge was to stabilize Iraq to the point where it could eventually start governing itself without our help, and that is plainly not taking place (and how is that compatible anyway with the claim of Gen. David H. Petraeus that a successful counterinsurgency strategy could take 9-10 years, as noted here)?

And then of course, we have the testimony of the Iraqis themselves on the four-year anniversary of the war last March 19th here, who say simply that “we are in hell” (gosh, you mean they actually don’t view us as “liberators” any more, Dick? How shocking!).

I know this is “water wet, sky blue” stuff, but it bears repeating.

Update 11/06/07: I knew this business about the "success of the surge" was crap, but this proves it as far as I'm concerned.