Washington Post: Don’t look now, Obama, but Iraq war may be won

Unlike The New York Times, The Washington Post has not dedicated itself to the defeat of democracy in Iraq.

The Post’s reporters did mangle the Jessica Lynch story and allow the Pentagon to take the blame, but its editorial writers have been much more even-handed in evaluating the liberation of Iraq. The Post’s editorial writers were smart enough to catch on early to Joseph Wilson’s dishonest grandstanding and Valerie Plame’s not-so-innocent role in sending him on a wasteful CIA-paid trip to Africa. (She wasn’t outed; she was exposed.)

So it should be no surprise that a Washington Post editorial today says: “Don’t look now, but the U.S.-backed government and army may be winning the war.” And it advises Barack Obama that he has to start considering that, if elected president, he may have to work with a successful Iraq democracy.

THERE’S BEEN a relative lull in news coverage and debate about Iraq in recent weeks -- which is odd, because May could turn out to have been one of the most important months of the war.

While Washington’s attention has been fixed elsewhere, military analysts have watched with astonishment as the Iraqi government and army have gained control for the first time of the port city of Basra and the sprawling Baghdad neighborhood of Sadr City, routing the Shiite militias that have ruled them for years and sending key militants scurrying to Iran. …

Eighteen American soldiers died in May, the lowest total of the war and an 86 percent drop from the 126 who died in May 2007.

If the positive trends continue, proponents of withdrawing most U.S. troops, such as Mr. Obama, might be able to responsibly carry out further pullouts next year. Still, the likely Democratic nominee needs a plan for Iraq based on sustaining an improving situation, rather than abandoning a failed enterprise. …

When Mr. Obama floated his strategy for Iraq last year, the United States appeared doomed to defeat. Now he needs a plan for success.

Views that fit. Imagine The New York Times running an editorial like that. That would require The Times, first, to weigh real facts and, second, to abandon its dedication to the victory of fascism, fanaticism and genocide in Iraq. Don’t hold your breath for such a transformation.

The rest of us will plan for freedom, and encourage it.

Frank Warner

Comments

[CJW]

It's not an issue. Obama will not win the presidency and he won't have to deal with Iraq at all.

[Frank Warner]

That might be what you wish for.

If wishful thinking worked, The New York Times would have kept Poland under Communism and Iraq under fascism. Even with tons of ink and oodles of desire, an idea can go only so far before it's snared by the cunning currents of history.

[Christopher Taylor]

I'm hoping that this will actually drive the story to the top again instead of where it's been buried by the legacy media for months. This cannot help Senator Obama, but it does help Senators Clinton and McCain.