Despite al the doom, all the demoralization, all the defeatism, the United States, the U.K , and the Iraqi people have turned the corner. Not only has General Petreaus brought hope and a chance at happiness to the desperate Iraqi people . He has reminded the world that, at the end of the day, the world needs America to believe in itself and its unique place to stand and sacrifice and , ultimatetly to succeed. Americans, and the British too, should be smiling today.

Corley Everett, Louisville, Kentucky

I'm just happy as long as we can keep terrorists focused on Baghdad and as far from Boston as possible!

I'd rather fight over there than here.

H Glenn, Michigan, United States

Lets let the generals fight the war the right way, not the politicians. If you think this is cruel, what about all the bombings and beheadings from our infamous enemy. Go all out. That is what happened in WWII. Drop the bombs on the enemy. War should be won on the battle field. Also take care of iran, who is letting in killers of our troops.

Leonard M., Long Island, NY

Heaven forbid that we let the experts in the field, the generals, do their job instead of unqualified blowhards in Washington who only know how to criticize and tear down people better than them.

Mojo Brown, Lexington, Kentucky, USA

Congress did appoint Petraeus, but it was unanimous. He was hailed by Democrats as the perfect choice. When his reports don't match their political agenda, all of a sudden, he's an unworth, untrustworthy choice.

Brent Buchanan, Montgomery, AL

The situation in Iraq, as a result of the three (3) factions
Kurds/Sunnis/Shite is so volatile that if we leave,
there will be Ethnic cleansing. Make no mistake about
this, it will happen!

Our soldiers, should not have died in vain, for political
purposes.

Nothing less then Victory!

To the U.S. Military, Thank You for doing what you do!

Leo, miami, Florida

Win in Iraq as the general says I am sure the we can. However, that has never been the contention. We won in Iraq militarily over four years ago. The contention is about what we are doing there in the first place. Certainly, we are not trying to liberate the Iraqi people from themselves. Most Iraqis do even not want us there. The insurgency is trying to tell us so. What then is the purpose of this occupation? Obviously, we are there with lack of moral cause.

Robert, Hampton, Virginia

Gen Petraeus is a four star general, with impeccable credentials and a lifetime of service to the country. He is being pilloried and his character impugned because he did not say what the left wing of the Democrat party wanted him to say. There is certainly a legitimate discussion to be had about when and how the US should move beyond the war, but not by putting down such a fine man or stating that his is a toady for Bush.

It's telling that what is good news to the majority of Americans is strangely bad news to the left wingers in the Democrat party.

This is because the left wing base of the Democrat party has so committed itself to the goal of achieving a humiliating defeat in Iraq, that no amount of good news would please them. In fact, the worst thing possible for their efforts at taking the White House in 08 would be the success of American efforts in Iraq.

Daniel Hey, Lynchburg, VA, USA

"it's amazing that self indulgent people are more qualified to make determinations about what is happening in Iraq than the people on the ground. If anyone wants to complain about the lack of military personnel and equipment we don't need to look any further than Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and the US Congress. Our country is in pathectic shape because of our liberal policies over the last 40 years and the unwillingnes of our news media to put aside their agenda and let Americans decide for themselves. I hope we survive, God bless our children.

Bill , Pensacola, Florida

One thing the democrats could do--but won't--is stop funding for the biggest U.S. Embassy in the world now under construction in Iraq. It is the proposed headquarters for the U.S. to stay in Iraq for decades and from which to govern not only Iraq but the Middle East.

Cutting funding for this construction project would signal the Bush plans are dead, we will not stay in Iraq forever, and we won't run the Middle East.

That will clear the air, repudiate the Bush policy, and make it easier to get out of Iraq. But the Democrats won't do it, because they in fact support the Bush policy. By posturing in opposition to Bush and the war, they are merely trying to use public disenchantment to defeat Republicans next year. But really get out of Iraq? They have no plans to do that.

Randolph Phillips, Shiloh, GA, USA

Let the Generals do their job. At first the democrats were annoying. Now they're downright despicable for playing politics with national security. Since defeat in Iraq is politically expedient for the democrats, they will do everything to see that happens--even if it means ignoring the advice from the most qualified military mind on the ground, favoring some ABC/BBC poll to the expertise of a highly decorated and battle tested four star general.

Noel Alcoba, Seattle, WA

I struggle with the opposition to being there. I don't think anyone believes our pulling out would be helpful.
It seems so clear how harmful it would be to leave a vacuum there with the threats in the region. Whatever the reason for getting there we are there. It just seems like pulling out early would compound whatever we have done wrong to this point. Do we not think our valliant soldiers understand their risk against the nightmare it would be without them there?

Dwayne, Atlanta, Georgia

It is absolutely amazing and appalling to hear people impugn the integrity of a man (Gen. Petraeus) UNANIMOUSLY annointed by Congress (that would include anti-war Democrats, too for those of you who don't unstand the word 'unanimous') as the best man we have to help turn the Iraq conflict around.

Apparently he's the best we have as long as he announces failure and defeat in Iraq. Apparently he's to be trusted ONLY in the event the news is bad. If there's progress or a good turn of events, Bush must have directed him to lie.

You people should be ashamed of yourselves. It's fine to disagree with the war on moral grounds. If's fine to disagree with the mission or criticize Mr. Bush's leadership. However, when disagreement becomes increasingly strained, unreasonable, and incoherent, LOGICAL people look in the mirror and consider they may need to rethink their opinions.

But NO! The anti-war, anti-America forces have become increasingly unhinged, unreasonable- and now irrelevant.

Brian, Baltimore, MD

But Mr. Freeman, these "unwinnable wars" have been won in the past, and against much more determined and better backed opposition. I can think of at least two, one took 17 years the other took 25, until those fighting, those cowering and those responsible for governing came to their senses and realised that once the dust had settled they still have to live in the same place and get along, irrespective of who thinks they "won".

I believe the General and the Ambassador, if you doubt their statistics trawl through the news reports coming out of Iraq and Afghanistan, trawl through the pages of IraqBodyCount. Then compare the figures for 2006 and 2007.

The numbers you will find verify what the General and the Ambassador are saying and the world's Press have been exalting in predicting the defeat of the US Forces efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2003.

Make no mistake if the Democrats win and pull the troops out prematurely, what results is THEIR doing.

Bill, Stavanger, Norway

you anti -Bush/War hater's will find your son's and daughters
drafted after the first nuclear weapon is used by Iran either here on American soil or over in europe,or Iraq.
the war is on, defeat them now with thousands of dead or put it off for tommorow with millions of dead. THINK

blacklock, Albuquerque, New Mexico

Uhh. Richard.... how is the left going to take back the white house through revolution when you took away all the guns? To have a revolution you have to have guns. Private ownership of guns. Isn't the left against this?

Confused Liberal, Seattle, WA

You have to admire the self deception of liberals in my country. Take for example Keith in Milwaukee who posted here we claims that you cannot trust Gen. Petraeus or Amb Croker because George Bush appointed them. This may come as quite a shock to some, but the President nominates, and Congress eiter approves or does not approve that nomination. If I recall correctly the Presidents nomination of Gen Petrarus for his current position gather 97 or more of the 100 United States Senators - the Senate being controled by the Democrat Party at the time. Mr. Crockers nomination was also approved by the Senate.

Having read the comment of those like Keith you might be tempted to think that the Democrat Party had nothing to do with the generals appointment or with the current US actions in Iraq, and if you depended on their comments you could be forgiven for such. You though are informed readers and will remember that Gen Petreaus came before the Senate with the Surge as his stratergy.

Raford Bunker, Atlanta, GA USA

I wonder who the EU will go crying to when the Iranians have nukes and missiles capable of hitting England?

Simon Carius, Hampshire, UK

America left Vietnam without disastrous consequences (except for American prestige). But just pulling out of an Iraq in turmoil (predicted by many in and out of US and UK governments - including myself - were there an invasion not approved by the UN) would have unforseeable, possibly catastrophic results not just throughout the Middle East, but worldwide.

Iraq has one thing going for it - virtually every country has a national interest in a stable Iraq. This near unanimity needs to be brought to bear on all parties (in Iraq and its neighbours, including Israel) by an urgent major diplomatic offensive which would involve the removal of US troops once concented intense worldwide pressure had brought reasonable stability.

Meanwhile US troops would have to remain to hold the ring. That is the price the US public must pay for the blunder of this illegal war. Whatever the popular pressure to cut and run, the Democrats must accept this, and press for such a diplomatic offensive.

John Pedler, London , UK

How Long did it take before the U.S. was able to get their
act together after the revolutionary war with England? When
are we going to remove our troops from Europe and Korea ?
Americans are not willing to fight for anything anymore with the
exception of our military of course. The main stream media and the Democrats in the House and Senate want to surrender. They want to loose this war. Bush appointed General Petraeus but the Senate approved him unanomously.
I say lets win this .. IT is winable. Let's give the military what they need and LET them Win.

Clem Amore, Crest Hill, IL

The U.S. is winning the war! For starters, we are out gunning the Islamic radicals by a ratio of about 30:1. It is like an NFL team playing a high school team.

However, our mighty military does have a few disadvantages: 1. The left-leaning media focus on what goes wrong, rather than what is going right over in Iraq and Afghanistan. They can't help themselves - for the media it is political. 2. Unlike the enemy, we log reports of when, where and at whom we fire weapons. The Islamic fanatics fire at crowds and detinate bombs in markets. 3. The Move-On.org like groups in America, financed by socialist George Soros, are tying the hands of good democrats, because the group is a $ money source.

After the fall of Saddam and thanks to the U.S., girls in Iraq can now go to school, and women can vote!! In fact, all people now have a choice when voting vs. the dictatorship that existed. Yes, these are challenging times, but with courage and faith good will pravail

John Sheridan, Issaquah, U.S.A. / Washington

Winning in Iraq means reaching the point to where the Iraqis can defend themselves against the insurgency as well as govern themselves. When US Soldiers have put themselves out of a job, that is success. Hell, we already won the war, that didn't take long at all. It's the radicals that are the difficulty. SIMON, Get you facts straight before you speak. What was described yesterday WAS the start of an exit strategy. Look at the power point provided by Petraeus. You should worry about your own country's affairs. At the rate the Muslim occupation of England is progressing, it won't be long before you're whistling another tune. The problem lies in that any strategic information that is shared with the public is used by Al-Qaeda. It must be vague! If "we" truly want our troops to be safe and for momentum to go our way the public need to understand that we might just have to be kept in the dark from time to time. It is a much smaller sacrifice than the draft! No one likes War! Not even US

Chris, Corpus Christi, US

The Democrats were very happy to confirm Petraeus's appointment at Senate hearings and the like. Now suddenly he is a political mouthpiece because his sober military assessment of the gains and risks doesn't fit their need to win anti-war votes
He is simply doing his job in a methodical and balanced way. There is clearly progress on the ground, with no safe AQ havens, a large haul of bad guys and former Saddam supporters and tribes switching sides. There will inevitably be more spectacular bombings and killing of opponents by Iraq factions, but like in Northern Ireland, the power of the IRA-lookalikes is being diminished.
It is also quite wrong and irresponsible to criticise a General's military view as 'political'. Ryen Crocker handles the political side! How long before the Democrats, if returned to power, appoint their own truly political generals? Politics has no part to play in the conduct of military operations and the Democrats let themselves down with this innuendo.

royc, London, UK

How many turning points are necessary before we can rightfully and humbly say to the world, "we broke it."?

As a frequent visitor to your site, allow me to represent America for a fleeting moment to say to your readers and the rest of the world that everyday Americans do not want this. The majority don't want a war for the sake of slinging fallic bombs and bullets against 24 million some-odd countrymen for the sake of three evil individuals. Iraq is a mistake that my children as well as future generations of our otherwise great country will pay for, possibly dearly.

It shames me to see General Petraeous following in Westmoreland's footsteps by giving our handicapped President more of a free hand to continue this bloody charade for the next six months (the big secret to the rest of the world: we can't keep it going after next April! Hooray for Benchmarks, timetables, drawdowns, pullouts.... meaningless talking points at the expense of human life.

Michael, Baton Rouge, LA

It's easy to knock what someone says as being truthful just on a connection to his boss. The fact remains that you can't take a nation of disparate ideologies and factionalism and turn it into a secure state with a relative freedom in 4 1/2 years. I object to anyone calling this war "unwinnable." It's only unwinnable if you aren't prepared to go all the way. Having been there, I understand one thing about the Iraqi people: they just want to go about their lives. About 10%, maximum, of the population is actively engaged in offensive sectarian violence. One positive trend noted is that when the Shia saw the news about Sunni in Anbar province giving al Qaeda the ol' "Heave Ho," they started to take a close look at the Mahdi Army/Quds force, and are starting to do the same. Anbar is the test case for al Qaeda, and it's not looking good for UBLs minions in Iraq. Yes, the Quds force is in Iraq, with or without the consent of the Iranian gov't. You guess on the consent, ;)

Tony, Indianapolis, US/IN

It is amazing to see the level of brainwashing that your readers evidently have been subjected to with regards to the noble war on terror. The Press (as in Vietnam) has worked SO hard to lose this war FOR the military, and thus turn public sentiment against the war. I am in Iraq, in Al Anbar province, so let me tell you that WE ARE WINNING. General Petraeus is telling the truth and, like Ronald Reagan's legacy regarding the Soviet Union and its "evil empire", George W. Bush will be vindicated by historians in the years to come. God bless our President, and God bless the United States of American on this Sixth Anniversary of the Isalmo Terrorist Murders.

John Howe, Al Anbar, Iraq

Comparisons to WWII and Vietnam are irrelevant. This is not WWII. There were no WMD in Iraq, something the "loony left" said from the beginning.

A secular ruthless dictatorship has now been turned into a de facto theocracy. Iraq has provided, and continues to provide, al Qaeda with more recruits - It could not have been better if bin Laden planned it himself. Iraq was not a terrorist breeding ground before its invasion. Failure in the war has also fulfilled Iran's long term ambition of becoming a regional power. Is this a "winning strategy"?

Iraq may be winnable.. But only if the US makes peace with the insurgents who have been attacking US soldiers.

The war where al Qaeda could have been defeated easily - in Afghanistan - was underfunded because of this poorly planned neocon wet dream. Now it too is in danger of being lost. And in Afghanistan and Iraq, men far braver and more honourable than those who so cavalierly planned this debacle pay the price daily.

Katherine, Canada,

Simply watch video from 2003 of the Bush Administration's "experts" telling the world why the war in Iraq was needed in the first place and see if you can believe what Petraeus and Crocker say. Withdrawal from Vietnam in 1968 would have saved thousands of lives on both sides and resulted in the exact same relationship that we have with Vietnam today. Removing the troops does not make the deaths of the soldiers to date any less heroic. It honors their lives and the ones that will be saved by our withdrawal. What will be gained by more deaths only to hear from the Bush Administration in 2008 that no one could have predicted that the Iraqis could not take over security or run their government? Are we truly this gullible and ignorant?

Tom, MADISON , CT/ USA

How many believe if President Bush keeps troops at or near 100k soldiers up until he leaves office and the democrats win that troop levels will be "dramatically drawn down?

Bob, Simpson, SC

The war is not unwinnable for the US. Our military and financial capabilities far outweigh those of our adversaries. The only question is whether our resolve to win is sustainable. Do Americans understand the threat to us and millions of other innocent people, if we quit? Based on what I've seen, the answer is clearly NO! The anti-war crowd values the life of one American soldier a thousand times more than those who have suffered for decades under the tyranny of Saddam and Islam. They are blind to the economic and security threats that will await us down the road, if we give in to radical Islam right now. They have chosen a short-term, selfish agenda that ignores the long-term threat of capitulation to the forces of tyranny; forces that will make it their life's work to establish a world-wide Islamic state that denies freedom to people everywhere. We can either pay the price now to ensure that our freedom and democracy are preserved or we can pay a substantially higher price later.

Darrell, Charles Town, WV, USA

I have just read the healines re US winning in Iraq,;can someone tell me winning what.? Since occupation more people have been killed in Iraq than even during S Hussein's murderous rule. So this statement needs to be looked into. There was no "smoking gun" there at all. The US and the UK went in without UN support, so I ask the question again, what does the US claim they are winning

jane chambers, Ipswich, UK

Let's back up a little. If Saddam were still in power--the same Saddam who waged war with Iran over a border dispute, who turned his country into a "Repuplic of Fear," who launched the first Gulf War, who looted Kuwait and threatened to invade Saudi Arabia, who ignited 600 Kuwaiti oil wells, who gave safe haven to Ramsay Yusef, the first World Trade Center bomber, who attempted via his direct agents to assassinate a U.S. president, who embezzeled his country's oil exports to enrich his immediate family, and yes, who colluded with Al Qaeda in the 9/11 attacks--we would be living in a very different world today. Bush had the guts to eliminate this monster. That should be the perspective as we debate how to conduct the current campaign. With Islamic fanaticism not letting up anytime soon, countries of character--Britain, Australia, Norway, the Netherlands, Germany, Albania and others--are fighting this evil.

Mark, Jacksonville, Oregon / USA

The war was a hopeless lost cause from the beginning. Regardless of our short term gains, Iran will be there when we leave and they will call the shots in Iraq.

It was a horrible mistake to remove this dictator, as foul as he was, who did not threaten the US. And as unfortunate as it is, every person who died in this war, died in vain.

Former 0341 in the USMC

Mike , Tulsa, Oklahoma

It is completely pitiful to watch this country and this congress listen to this next administration "ad man" come on stage to sell us the next six months and $60 BILLION worth of inexcusable and completely unwinnable war. No occupying country in history has done what we claim to be doing successfully. It has never been possible to bomb people into thinking your way. NEVER! I can only dream of what could have been done for America with the money we've wasted over there. I'm sick about it.

Kit Levey, PINECLIFFE, USA/COLORADO

Keith, both Crocker and Petraeus were confirmed by the Senate...

Brian, Shanghai, China

Petraeus says we are winning in Iraq.Let's see...there is no functioning government, the infrastructure is little more than rubble, Sunnis and Shiites are killing each other and insurgents are able to attack at the time and place of their choosing. Life for the average Iraqi is pretty pathetic.
Just a little more time, there's light at the end of the tunnel, victory is at hand, just a little more time, a little more time.... General Pretaeus seems to have
taken a spaceship to the same planet where Bush resides and gotten into bed with him.

Bruce L. Northwood, Washington, D.C., USA

It is not good General David Petraeus giving us a report on Iraq violece. He was appointed by President Bush. We need to hear independent report. President Bush is just dragging his feet and America down even further. Whole world knows US has failed to subdue the Iraqis. Occupation has not worked. US now needs to get out of Iraq. Iraqi people refused to be grateful to US for attacking their country based on lies. I think it would be best for everyone if US simply ends the occupation and leaves Iraq. Nobody really believes what the US says anymore. They have lost all sympathy after Abu Ghraib tortures and other violations in Iraq. US has now a very bad reputation, and that is making people hate US more and more. US government must do something to restore trust in American values and get back its good standing.

Z Hussain, Rochdale, UK

Mr. Bush has steped into a swamp that he can't withdraw his feet.

Richie, Harbin,

Democracy requires empathy, compromise, an agreement to go along with majority decisions that are not in the interest of your particular group or party and submission to the rule of law - even when you disagree with it.

These concepts are utterly foreign to Iraqi - and indeed the majority of Arab - culture. We can not impose them. The fact that Bush and Blair did not understand this is truly staggering - and very frightening.

Tony Jones, Grantham, Lincs

It's an astonishing piece of arrogance to claim something is "unwinnable", particularly when it's true that the only way to lose anything in life is to quit ... and that's precisely when people like Simon and Mick want to happen.

Iraq will only become another Vietnam if we betray the Iraqi people like we did the South Vietnamese people. The left would love nothing more than for President Bush or his administration to pre-emptively declared defeat thereby snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

Applying anti-war kookery to World War II, it was actually a defeat because over 400,000 American soldiers died in both the European and Pacific theaters of operation and a total of 35 million innocent civilians died in a war that by Neville Chamberlains estimation was completely avoidable. I mean, why did we go to war with Germany when it was Japan that bombed Pearl Harbor? By modern leftist logic FDR was suckered into an avoidable fight with Hitler.

Hank, Champaign, IL

"...a desperate White House attempt this week to secure extra time..."

Actually the President has all the time he wants unless Congress can do something to stop him. The Democrats in Congress has never had the votes to do that in the past and they don't have the votes now.

In the past few months all the news, and reports from independent analysts, and reports from members of Congress who have returned from Iraq, and even the British MOD and Prime Minister have agreed that the surge is producing results in Iraq.

Now Gen Petraeus report has made it unanimous. Yet Cindy Sheehand and Keith Olberman et. al. disagree?

Mike Sorensen, las vegas, USA

"I see tangible progress. Iraqi security elements are being rebuilt from the ground up ... The institutions that oversee them are being reestablished from the top down. And Iraqi leaders are stepping forward, leading their country and their security forces courageously in the face of an enemy that has shown a willingness to do anything to disrupt the establishment of the new Iraq ... There are reasons for optimism ... Momentum has gathered in recent months. With strong Iraqi leaders out front and with continued coalition -- and now NATO -- support, this trend will continue. It will not be easy, but few worthwhile things are." -- Gen. David Petraeus, Sept. 26, 2004.

JimBob, Encino, CA, USA

Cris;
How can you say we are not winning? Was not part of the reason we are there to kill insurgents so they would not attack the US? May I remind you and those who read this that we were attacked when we were not in Iraq, our Marines were killed when we were not in Iraq and now that we are there the liars will tell you we would be better off letting the Arab militants have the whole country and it's oil to sell in order that they can kill us with maybe nukes from those dollars. Not me; let our soilders protect us.

John, Opelousas, La.

It is sickening to see so many Americans who are wholly invested in our defeat in Iraq. For years democrats have railed against this administration for its perceived Iraq policy failures and at this moment, when it appears clear that this administration has successfully adjusted in Iraq and we are winning this war, it is stupefying to see those same democrats now finding ways to reject our hard fought successes. We are winning this war. We can win this war if its die-hard detractors can somehow divest themselves of an
American defeat at all costs.

Craig, Salt Lake City,

Tom:
Thank you for your one sided view. Dem.Reps:Lantos(Calif) Ackerman(NY) and Wexler(Fla)---far left social progressives gave their one-sided failure guaranteed warped views. You failed to report General Petreaus's and Amb. Crocker's responses. These were the telling remarks.

Pull out quickly now and both the UK and the US will reap a whirlwind.

David B. Monier-Williams, Scottsdale, US

The Democrats have painted themselves into a corner from which they cannot escape. They are invested in defeat and this issue will lead to a Thompson presidency.

Paul Wellstone, Iron Range, MN

The real act of self deception is driven by the arrogance of an individual who would decide that his comfortable abode in Bracknell would afford him such boundless wisdom and insight that he knows more about Iraq than the general leading the troops there.

Jack Weixel, Walnut Creek, CA, USA

What's astonishing is not that progress is being made, it's that so many of us don't want it to happen. The strategic goal here has always been to force the militant fundamentalists to play defense, while catalyzing democracy and liberty in the middle east. Surely this is a nobler ambition than partisan domestic political gains in the US congress. Osama bin Laden himself says Iraq is the central battleground in his war on us, why don't you want us to defeat him there?

Jim, Philadelphia, Pa, USA

Sorry kids, Democrats have no morality at all, to say nothing of 'high ground'. They are twisting in the winds of public opinion, all the while trying to shape public opinion for no better reason than to regain political power. Insurgencies are a long term project, 10 years or so. They KNOW they can't/won't leave Iraq, and have stated as much. Such pandering, such polemic, borders on treason, betraying the national interest for personal power.

Gary, Woodburn, Or

When I was drafted into the United States Air Force during the Viet Nam War, I was quite anti military. After 2 years on active duty, I learned a great deal. One of the things I learned was that members of the United States military are studiously non political. It is not that they have no opinions. They rigidly refuse to express them in word or deed. To assert that Gen Petraeus is a pupet of the White House is both rediculous and proof of ignorance.

Barry Jacobs, M. D., Denton, Texas USA

There is only ONE important question; What does it mean to 'loose' the war?

We could ask President Bush, or Nancy Pelosy. But their oppinion really doesn't matter. In truth, neither does yours (the reader). The ONLY oppinion as to the meaning of the phrase 'the US has lost the war' is the oppinion of the terrorists. So what do THEY say. According to them, it means that democracy ALL OVER THE WORLD is defeated and the Zionists ALL OVER THE WORLD are dead or converted.

It's NOT about the US's foreign policy. According to public statements by the terrorists, they LAUGH at those who help their cause by claiming that the US is in the wrong and all the US has to do is change their foreign policy to make the world a more peaceful place. It's not about Iraq, or Palestine, or where the sun don't shine.

So, we are faced with a simple choice. Either we at least hold our ground if not win, or we die.

Thats it.

Jon, USA,

UNCLE DAVID'S FAIRY TALES

Ha-hah ha haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

Arthur Bruce, SCOTTSDALE, U.S.A./Ariz.

This is America's only opportunity since the Second World War to have a generation of a Middle East nation (apart from Israel) unbrainwashed by Islamo-dictatorships and open the door to the concept of a real democratic Islamic Republic at peace with the rest of the world in the ME. These dictatorships need the brainwashing and constant enemy to stay in power just as they have done for the past 40 years.

I do not understand why Petraeus doesn't note that the last 50 years of Middle East policy to do nothing while the brainwashing continues leads only to a repeat of six wars, countless acts of terrorism and an eventual plane smashing into a New York skyscrapper. To claim that there was "peace" in the Middle East before the Iraq war just doesn't hold any water.

Petraeus and his forces unfortunately must stay until the people of Iraq get the benefits of an open society and Iran ends the targetting of civilian opposition in it's proxy war if this opportunity is to be realized.

Craig Pichach, Calgary, Canada

I almost feel sorry for all the 2006 voters who were mislead by democrats who stated they would pull our troops out of Iraq if elected.....when these politicians knew congressional removal of our troops was neither likely or prudent.

Bob, Simpson, SC

Sometimes it is better to let people sort out their own problems by themselves. If that means the breakup of Iraq then so be it. It was never a country until the British drew the colonial borders in the 1920's. There was never such an Iraqi people till the British invented one. Other countries that comprised of different people like the former Czeckslovakia broke up.

Anthony King, Ely, UK

Listen to the General, rather than people's misinterpretation, here.

As for Hague - what happened to the Tories? - sad.

David Williamson, Tucson, AZ USA

I sympathise with those who say we shouldn't quit, that we must win, that we must deliver peace and democracy to previously oppressed people, that we didn't have an exit strategy in WWII other than winning.

BUT... What if the population of the 'defeated country' refuses to 'surrender', regardless of anything their official government might say or do? What if they see the foreign troops trying to liberate them and deliver them to a better life simply as oppressors and occupiers - which many Iraquis do? What if various sections of the population see the deposition of the old governments simply as an opportunity to assume control for themselves by force of arms?

Anyone drawing direct comparisons between Iraq and Germany in WWII has no understanding of Middle East culture and history. Sadly that includes President Bush and ex-Prime Minister (hooray) Tony Blair.

I salute the US and British military. Once again they have been given an impossible task by their political masters.

Tony Jones, Grantham, Lincs

The truth of the matter is that it doesn't matter what General Petraeus tells Congress (or for that matter what the "truth" about Iraq really is). Everyone on both sides of the argument has long since made up their mind on this issue and the ceaseless partisan maneuvering - all aimed not at Iraq but at winning the White House in 2008 - will continue as usual. I expect to continue to see much finger-pointing and few real solutions.

K Clark, London, UK

The surge IS working. Everyone who's been to Iraq... Republicans and Democrats, even the media, say that it is. Anbar is quiet, when last year it was a battle zone. The US has done the hardest part in a counterinsurgency by getting the population on its side and against the insurgents.

The reason we can withdraw troops by next summer is simple; those who are weakly motivated will quit and join with the Iraqis, and those who are strongly motivated will be captured or killed by then.

However, if we abdicate the battlefield, we will lose the war that we have already won. The only way we lose is if we leave early. And, leaving early throws away the sacrifices we've made.

It's too bad that the Democrats have invested heavily in failure, so heavily that they cannot stand to listen to Petraeus tell the truth.

John, Seattle, WA USA

Winning in Iraq means reaching the point to where the Iraqis can defend themselves against the insurgency as well as govern themselves. When US Soldiers have put themselves out of a job, that is success. Hell, we already won the war, that didn't take long at all. It's the radicals that are the difficulty. SIMON, Get you facts straight before you speak. What was described yesterday WAS the start of an exit strategy. Look at the power point provided by Petraeus. You should worry about your own country's affairs. At the rate the Muslim occupation of England is progressing, it won't be long before you're whistling another tune. The problem lies in that any strategic information that is shared with the public is used by Al-Qaeda. It must be vague! If "we" truly want our troops to be safe and for momentum to go our way the public need to understand that we might just have to be kept in the dark from time to time. It is a much smaller sacrifice than the draft! Noone likes War! Not even US.

Chris, USA,

I find it laughable that our politicians cite the lack of political progress in Iraq as a reason to pull out when the political progress in our own country is obviously going backward at a faster pace than Iraq's is going forward.

Larsinkima, Yakima, Wa, USA

Good news: The U.S. military and allies are beating the enemy by a ratio of about 50:1.
Don't believe the left-leaning reporters who have an agenda and focus on what is going wrong in Iraq and Afghanistan. Our military might has resulted in progress that will have blessings for generations to come...Look beyond the NY Times coverage. Believe the brave men and women and generals on the gound over politicians with agendas.

And now people, including women, can vote for candidates of their choice for generations to come, rather than being forced to vote for one dictator. Think about it. And while fighting, new, updated schools are even being built, in Iraq!

As a country, during a time of war, when the enemy is determined to harm us, we must remain UNITED. Our culture and way of life is at stake. Stay vigilent with courage and faith. Don't give in and don't give up. America's glass is more than half full!

John Sheridan, Issaquah, U.S.A. / Washington

Keith - the choice of Petraeus was unanimous from BOTH parties. Let's get past this type of BS and start analyzing what is going on. There is far too much energy being wasted by both sides in these "debates". They told the truth, now what do we do with it? Please, let's use common sense and intelligence here. From what is at stake I would say the plan given yesterday for gradual withdrawal appears doable.

Jerry, Grand Rapids, Michigan

Our Foreign Policy is 180 degrees wrong. Dr. RON PAUL has stated prior to the war NOT TO GO. Now many agree with him. Please continue to listen to the debates. He is the only Rep canadate for President that is no war, bring the troops home now. It is killing our solders, families torn apart, traumatic injuries, emotional injury, and killing innocent victims in Iraq. Now we are messing with Iran - stay out of the Middle East, It is about OIL>


Brief Overview of Congressman RON PAUL’s Record:

He has never voted to raise taxes.
He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
He has never taken a government-paid junket.
He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.

He voted against the Patriot Act.
He voted against regulating the Internet.
He voted against the Iraq war.

He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.

Name Withheld, Glendale, az

Impressive performance by Petraeus and Crocker - as expected. However it still does not take away from the fact that the war per se is lost - 57 per cent of Iraqis do not want the "west" (?) interfering in their countries when such interference is based on the theft of Iraqi raw materials (oil). The west lost it´s moral authority in Guantanamo, Abu Ghraib, Fallujah, Ramadhi etc not to mention the lies about WMDs, dodgy dossiers, dodgy coverup military courts to root out murder and torture and war mongering. Massive numbers of Iraqis have voted with their feet and left and continue to do so. We will continue to blame Iran, Syria, Quds, Hezbollah, Al Sadr and the list goes on. Someone else is always to blame. Strange how again it boils down again a la central America to supporting paramilitaries or death squads - arming them against the central government authority with unaccountable weapons.

Michael O´Leary, Dublin, Ireland

The only wars we have ever lost are the ones we quit. If you declare the war unwinnable you naturally will not accept any facts that contradict your own unwinnable declaration and delude yourself into interpreting all facts as contributing to a an overall loss. I read the backup data for the report. I did not have time to listen to the testimony. The backup data seems convincing that the new strategy is having positive results. I have seen no data from any other source that contradicts the more positive direction of events. The only contradicting information is coming from emotion and irrationality and lacks supporting facts. Emotion and irrationality is no way to form a strategy.

wsj, baltimore, md

"It is an astonishing piece of self deception for any US official to claim that they are winning an unwinnable war, in which they have no moral high ground, and no realistic exit strategy."

Why is it "unwinnable"? Because you think it is too hard, or because you've already acquiesced?
Moral high ground? If you are referring to Abu Graib, a few undisciplined soldiers does not indict the entirety of Multi National Forces - Iraq. MNFI troops exercise more restraint than their Iraqi partners and are role models for them.
Exit strategy? Yes there is an exit strategy, and it doesn't include our tail between our legs.

And, while I'm here on a UK page, many thanks to the UK soldier and marine brothers who are helping to demonstrate courage, character, and commitment to a people who desperately need it. America is deeply indebted to you for your service, and I extend my gratitude.

Kelly, Kansas City, US

How much do you know about Hezbollah, Mick? Have you ever been to Lebanon? It is time for people to drop the clichés that this administration has brain-washed us with and start facing reality. Hezbollah is an organization that enjoys considerable popular support in Lebanon, including from a large portion of the Christian population, not because of its links to the Iranian regime but because it is seen as one of the least corrupted forces of the country. Unless we grow up and stop living in our Manichean fantasies, we will never find political solutions to the problems of the Middle East and continue to sink in that violent downward spiral that has claimed so many lives among U.S. soldiers and innocent Iraki civilians. The situation in Iraq will never get better because there is not a single example in history of an occupation getting better with time. Petraeus is a mouthpiece for an administration that has invaded a country solely for its oil.

Amro Hamzawi, Los Angeles, USA

The surge is working; keep up the good work! Now what we need are .408 Cheytac-equipped scout-sniper teams to set up 2,500-yard buffer zones along and across the Syrian and Iranian borders to stop the flow of foreign jihadis and EFP's. And to the spineless democrats...is that foot-tapping I hear?

USC, San Francisco, USA

Winning in Iraq means reaching the point to where the Iraqis can defend themselves against the insurgency as well as govern themselves. When US Soldiers have put themselves out of a job, that is success. Hell, we already won the war, that didn't take long at all. It's the radicals that are the difficulty. SIMON, Get you facts straight before you speak. What was described yesterday WAS the start of an exit strategy. Look at the power point provided by Petraeus. You should worry about your own country's affairs. At the rate the Muslim occupation of England is progressing, it won't be long before you're whistling another tune. The problem lies in that any strategic information that is shared with the public is used by Al-Q!aeda. It must be vague! If "we" truly want our troops to be safe and for momentum to go our way the public need to understand that we might just have to be kept in the dark from time to time. It is a much smaller sacrifice than the draft! Noone likes War! Not even US

Chris, USA,

Too many in the past have claimed unwinnable wars. And all sorts of other defeatist tripe. Should we listen to them, we will perish.

They prevailed in Vietnam, and cost America 58,000 dead, and millions of others in the region. Not to mention the damage caused to democracy.

Make that mistake again this time, and the cost will be much higher. Forget politics. Do not forget history.

The terrorists have stated their intentions clearly. To ignore this is to ignore history, and invite death, or submission. Remeber Hitler? He also clearly stated his intentions. He was also ignored. They said he could not be defeated.

Let's do the world a needed favor. WIN THIS WAR!

Allan Haus, New Orleans, La

We must do whatever it takes to win. Period.

Cheryl, Winchester, VA

For those of you who support pulling out now, what do you think the consequences will be for the middle east ?

Marv, Atlanta, USA/GA

I agree entirely with Andrew from Cleveland. America and Britain has a responsibility in Iraq to rebuild the country. Moreover, this is possible, and the surge is working. The only hope for Iraq is for American and British forces to remain where they are required. It would be disastrous for troops to be withdrawn, and setting a deadline for it would be catastrophic.

Huw, Guildford, UK

The situation is similar to that of Northern Ireland. Rightly or wrongly if you decide to go in militarily then once you are in you have to stay. Resolution of the situation takes at least a generation. I'm not saying it is right for troops to have been sent in to "liberate" in the first place, however now they are there it will be a big mistake to leave prematurely. Once committed these things take time - think 30 years. The problem of course is that in politics you can think much beyond 10 years.

Paul Ferry, Bristol, UK

What way will the democrats go now, they better get out and start polling or go over seas and commit treason like Kucinich. Maybe Hillaries buddies that are criminals that are donating to her will take the heat off from the idiotic comments of democrats. I thought the surge was a failure, O yah that's right you said that before it started. Like how you tried to dimiss the report before it was given. Where can I get your crystal ball that tell all, OH Wait never mind the one you have seems to be broken since you have been wrong about everything lately (Last 40 years).

Watchman, San Jose, CA

I see more quitters here. Why can't people see the long-term effects of pulling out of Iraq? It is our only chance to stabilize the Mideast. For once, I would like to see people stop politicizing the war. Surrendering is not the answer. In fact, it will bring the most peril in the long run. Some people will refuse to believe this even when presented with facts to the contrary.

Terry, Minneapolis, MN/USA

Where do some of you folks come from? Mission Accomplished was about the initial mission of deposing Saddam, which was accomplished. WMDs were found in Iraq after the regime change as detailed in the book named "Disinformation" by investigative reporter, Richard Miniter. If Saddam had no WMDs why was he unable to prove this to the UN inspectors, which would have allowed him to continue looting and pillaging Iraq, menacing his neighbors, paying the families of suicide bombers in Israel, and developing more biological and chemical weapons as soon as his friends the French and Russians succeeded in having the UN sanctions removed, which they were close to doing?
>
Why does the entire left wing worldwide have a problem with the notion of freedom and democracy for Muslims previously brutalized by Muslim tyrants?
>
Has it occurred to you critics that the Iraqis could have chosen reconstruction, peace and prosperity after Saddam was deposed, rather than killing each other? For what?

MarioG, Toledo, Ohio, USA

I am tired of hearing ignorant wealthy politicians from ALL sides of the aisle chastise our Military commanders. Yep, just like back in VietNam.
We have one last chance to help these people to a better life. Nobody discusses this point but I think that if the Iraqi people had functioning utilities and a real and protected flourishing infrastructure the people and their families would turn around and support us. Plus jobs and services would be created. This is an everyday basic need of any people. But it's all about the family. It sounds so naive and so simple doesn't it? Save the families; turn the country. Since there are so very few jobs this very simply means that now a 22 year old father of two doesn't have to dig that IED hole along that main road at 3AM for a cash payment to support and feed his family. He doesn't care who wins. He and his family survive day to day just like.............. SemperFi

JSR, Miami, FL

Andrew ...Bush wasnt elected (one L not two) the war is lost
at the expense of many americans ...what a waste of your life

bill okeefe, richmond , virginia

How difficult it must be for Americans today to truly relate to what is happening in a country such as Iraq which is so far removed from our daily lives.
I can't really expect them to understand the reality of this situation in all its terms. Most of us only see that several thousand of our brave men and women have died and enough is enough. Others have such a hatred of the President and his administration that they will never be able to recieve the truth no matter who delivers it to them.
I suggest that we talk to as many of our returning soldiers as possible to get the real story; "is it worth it and are we indeed making a difference in the lives of these people"?.
If thier comments would indeed reflect what we herad the general convey today and these "objectors" would still maintain thier stand that we should withdraw then what in essence they are doing is labeling every returning soldier a "liar".
How easy it is to react as we do when we are not the ones facing the reality.

Luis Castillo, Buford, Georgia

We should have not invaded Iraq. What we have set in motion, with our simple-minded approach to foreign affairs, will come back to haunt us. Whether we leave Iraq now with sectarian violence continuing, or if we get the problem solved, what we are going to end up with in part or all of Iraq is a democratic government that is more like Iran, with its extreme fanaticism.

Kevin Lewis, Rupert, ID

The war is not unwinnable for the US. Our military and financial capabilities far outweigh those of our adversaries. The only question is whether our resolve to win is sustainable. Do Americans understand the threat to us and millions of other innocent people, if we quit? Based on what I've seen, the answer is clearly NO! The anti-war crowd values the life of one American soldier a thousand times more than those who have suffered for decades under the tyranny of Saddam and Islam. They are blind to the economic and security threats that will await us down the road, if we give in to radical Islam right now. They have chosen a short-term, selfish agenda that ignores the long-term threat of capitulation to the forces of tyranny; forces that will make it their life's work to establish a world-wide Islamic state that denies freedom to people everywhere. We can either pay the price now to ensure that our freedom and democracy are preserved or we can pay a substantially higher price later.

Darrell, Charles Town, WV, USA

The fact that the surge has provided some relief to Bagdad is a positive development, even if just for the citizens residing there. But by next spring, if the Iraqi political landscape remains stagnant - then it is time to pivot out of Arabia.

Brian, Indianapolis, Indiana

General Petraeus is great media material, and any case he makes is likely to appear persuasive.

Fact is, the Surge is a gimmick to keep the troops in Iraq, pure and simple. And the Democrats are yelling and screaming in apparent opposition to the Bush Policy (set up a friendly Iraq government and keep thousands of U.S. troops there forever like in Korea, and rule the Mid East from the Baghad embassy now under construction).

But the Democrats' opposition is more apparent than real, They basically have signed on to the Bush Iraq Policy. Their surface opposition has a practical aim. The democrats hope to beat the republicans next year by tapping into public disenchantment with the Iraq War. Folks are outraged.

Petraeus also criticized Iran, an ominous note which has not been picked up by the Democrats. Have they also signed on to Bush's plans to attach Iran. Maybe.

Only Europe can save my country from itself, our elected leaders are leading us to disaster.

Randolph Phillips, Shiloh, GA, USA

Don't dismiss Petraeus so soon. He was confirmed unanimously by the Senate, and if he was in charge from the start, this war probably would have been over by now. He was actually reprimanded by Rumsfeld over pushing to switch over to counterinsurgency tactics because, after all, there weren't insurgents in Iraq but just "dead-enders." Right.

Seriously, people who dismiss Petraeus as a politician...are you really saying that he decided to go to military academy, become airborne certified, go through ranger training, write the book on counterinsurgency, all through years in the military, all for the oft-chance that the US gets involved in a conflict in the Middle East and that he would have to defend it?

Alex, Portland, OR, USA

I wonder, if General Petraeus would have given his findings and decided that what we are doing there is not working and we must begin our retreat would you have said wow, this guy actually knows what he is talking about. It seems that unless someone agrees with you they must be complete idiots. Forget the fact that he is an extremely capable leader who cares for his troops. He would continue placing his troops in harms way if he did not believe that we were going to win. I wonder if you even read or listened to the full report. If you look at the facts it is obvious that what we have done thus far with the surge has been remarkable. The other point about maintaining the troop levels. If it takes 30,000 additional troops to secure an area for a while and later requires 30,000 less to maintain the same security level is that not progress. This would then be followed by even fewer troops to maintain the same level of security. Can anyone say progress?

John Berry, Honolulu,

Talk about a non-event.
Petraeus delivered the expected message, in the expected tone, and the expected coincidence of the General's view matching the White House view. Gosh!!!

Jack Tabor, Santa Monica, CA, USA

I was impressed by the complete grasp of the situation on the ground by both Petreaus and Crocker. For the first time it was clear to me that these people know what has to be done. The politicians, in particular the Democrats, would favour another Vietnam withdrawal causing fatal consequences to world security and offering terrorists another safe haven to operate from. There will be no quick patch up job to be accomplished in Irak thus systematic infrastructure development and support will prevail. Back-stabbing by politicians back home in their comfortable offices can only delay or even jeopardise the complete operation.

Peter, Koblenz, Germany

It is an astonishing piece of self-deception that the left-wing, western civilization hating, America hating, Bush hating extremists can continue to ignore the facts. When they denigrate the superiority of capitalism, classical liberalism, peace through strength, the evil empire, individual liberty, lower tax rates, or the effectivness of Bush's surge, the lefty loons are alway wrong. They FEEL like they are right but history, events, and facts always go against them. It must be frustrating to be so wrong so often. Perhaps they are just really really stupid.

Mike, Austin, Texas

Whether Petraeus or Crocker are right in their assessment of the progress, or lack thereof, in Iraq will only be apparent in retrospect. However, it is despicable for Moveon.org and even some Congressmen to call them dishonest men who fabricate their reports to please the President. Just because someone has a political opinion different from yours is no reason to call them dishonest, immoral, etc. I believe that Petraeus and Crocker honestly believe their testimonies and are looking for ways to help us "win" in Iraq. I don't give the same evaluation to the Democrats and their supporters who are just appeasers (though they may be honest, moral people as well)

Danny, Houston, USA/TX

What is this nonsense about an exit strategy?? What was our exit strategy in WW1, WW2? Win. How have the these brilliant strategists determined that the war is unwinnable? I am sure they must be graduates of a military colllege and a student of strategy and tactics.

Lee Sweeney, Pilot Mountain, NC

We the people need to take back the White house and Congrees alright! Not with words or votes, but with a good old fashion revolution. We are rotting from within and the Constitutional foundation of the U.S. has been eroded away with corporate funds and weak polititions.

Richard, Port ludlow, Washinton

ignore the report, pull out now, pick a side (sunnis of south) and start to supply them weapon so they can fight it out with the iran backed shittes. this way we don't lose soldier, we make money from the weapon sales, and no one will blame us for any more oil ambition. as for possibility of future terrorist attack on US, we will roll the dice on that.

joseph, Santa Monica,

Its a lie ... Like mission accomplished or weapons of mass destruction ... its just a matter of time before the truth outs this lie too.

beau pritchard, canton , usa

we are not winning the war. Americans cannot stay in Iraq forever and their is no plan bsides xing our fingers once we leave Iraq that the people will govern themselves. How is this possible?

chris, woodstock, Ga USA

American politicians should start listening to their generals rather than politicising the war. America and Britain should see it through to its successful conclusion, however long it takes. It can be done, and staying is preferable to withdrawing the troops and the chaos that will follow.

Huw Longton, Guildford, UK

Obviously Simon Freeman did not listen to the testimony of Petraeus and Crocker. I recommend going back and reading the transcript, Simon, then come back here and apologize.

Herman Luz, Freemont, CA

It is sad that so many will doubt the General, based on some misguided belief that he is playing a partisan role. Petraeus was confirmed unanimously by the US Senate, by BOTH parties, 81-0. He has an extensive record of valor and genius. If he says we're improving with mixed results and need more time, I say we listen. It is not like there is some other valid opinion on the table here.

Jordan Lewis, Baton Rouge, LA, USA

Does anyone REALLY expect a war to go as planned, to come to an ideal ending? Congressional Democrats, for the most part, are mental midgets with no historic perspective and no understanding of human nature and the forces of good and evil.

Carl, Bangor, Maine/U.S.A.

Right Mick, it's better to bury our heads in the sand.

Deeter, The BOUGE, Louisiana

I believe that Petraeus gave an honest assessment of the progress in Iraq. It just makes sense: more troops = more stability. My only question is that if the excess troops are removed, will the levels go back up? America can not be the police in Iraq. Just because a country does not fit into your perfect picture of what it should be postwar, does not mean that you have lost or failed. In the end, military success is finished, civil success is up to the Iraqis.

John, Hannover, Germany

General Petraeus' appointment was unanimously endorsed by all members of the Senate and House, both Demicrats and Republicans. As far as I know, no one in the House and only Biden in the Senate has disagreed with Move 0n. org. comment that General Petraues is General Betray Us. Does every Democrat in the House and Senate think General Petraeus is a dishonorable man?

Rodger King, Tampa, FL

This report highlights the critical flaw in the American war machine that terrorists are learning to exploit: the generals are not allowed to command the war. Legislators who have no experience with managing a war should step back and yield to those who have been trained specifically to do just that. With the generals back in command, the Coalition would win far sooner.

Bryce Smart, Seattle, Washington, USA

Our soldiers are fighting -- and dying -- for a president whose only plan is to keep them fighting and dying until he can toss the remains of his misbegotten war into the lap of his successor.

Walter F. Wouk, Cobleskill, New York

In a war in which we DO have the moral high ground, winning or losing is simply in our hands. I do believe that the democrats will allow the thousands of US soldiers who've died to do so in vain just to get ellected. To win we have to be on the streets everyday, which we are. Talking with the public and gaining there trust. Militarily we are turning the tides. The political process is the key to it all. Time is all we need... My opinion is not like the arm chair opinions of my friends who've commented. 2 Tours, 0IF2 and OIF4. -- Experience.

Andrew, Cleveland, Ohio,

I was impressed. Petraeus and Crocker presented the kind of sober, careful analysis needed. The stakes here are not small -- and should not be decided on the basis of slogans, domestic political advantage, or substituting what we wish were the case for the reality,

I was not impressed by the Congressional questioners.

John, Oregon , WI

If wondering whether we should believe Petraeus, all we need to do is remember who appointed him. And Crocker. QED?

Keith, Milwaukee, WI, USA

So if all goes well, we will sustain the surge for nine more months and then need just as many troops as we did before. If we have to work that hard to end up where we started, it is hard to see how we can be winning.

Samuel, Missoula, MT, USA

It is an astonishing piece of self deception for any US official to claim that they are winning an unwinnable war, in which they have no moral high ground, and no realistic exit strategy. Iraq will be riven by sectarianism - on the streets, in its armed forces, and in its government - for decades, and probobly for generations to come, and no talk of the 'surge', or its fallacious statistics will alter this.

Simon Freeman, Bracknell,

"It is increasingly apparent to both coalition and Iraqi leaders that Iran, through the use of the Quds force, seeks to turn the Iraqi special groups into a Hezbollah-like force to serve its interests and fight a proxy war against the Iraqi state and coalition forces in Iraq"

Here comes the next war.

Mick, Boston, Ma, USA