Numbers in Iraq show the Democrats were wrong

Washington Post Editorial:

NEWS COVERAGE and debate about Iraq during the past couple of weeks have centered on the alleged abuses of private security firms like Blackwater USA. Getting such firms into a legal regime is vital, as we've said. But meanwhile, some 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.

...

One of the reasons for changing the subject to the contractors was to distract from the success we are having on the ground in Iraq. It is part of the Democrats' noise machinery that is constantly looking for ways to lose in Iraq and make success more difficult. Who would replace the contractors they are complaining about? Combat troops of course would have to be pulled from their mission of securing Iraqi and killing the enemy in order to guard civilians working in Iraq.

The reason there is a shortage of combat troops is because Clinton and the Democrats reduced the size of the military in the 1990s. If that distraction is not enough, why not anger Turkey so that it will be more difficult for the use logistic support for war to function? That is the modern Democrat party doing what ever it can to lose the war.

Don Surber has more on Hillary's deceit on Iraq casualty counts.

The AP reports:

The civilian death toll in Iraq fell to its lowest level in recent memory Saturday, with only four people killed or found dead nationwide, according to reports from police, morgue officials and credible witnesses.

...

The four dead included three death squad victims found in Baghdad and the bodyguard of the Kirkuk police commander who was killed in a roadside bombing.

Bill Roggio has more on the dramatic drop in violence.

...

General Petraeus’ change in strategy, which pushed US forces from the large, secure bases into combat outposts, forward operating bases, battle positions and patrol bases in the urban, suburban and rural areas of Iraq has yielded real results. Coupled with a planned, concerted offensive against al Qaeda in Iraq and Shia extremists groups’ safe havens and a renewed engagement in reconstruction efforts, the new strategy allowed Sunni and Shia tribes to step up and provide security. The new strategy also enabled Sunni insurgent groups unhappy with al Qaeda’s attempts to dominate the insurgency to turn on the terror group and join the reconciliation process at the local level.

...

Note that this is just the opposite of what Democrats said was needed to stop the violence in Iraq. There is clear evidence that the Democrats were wrong as was the Hamilton-Baker report's prescription for Iraq. It is time for Democrats to admit this error and apologize to President Bush and the troops. I know they want, but they would if they had any integrity.

MNFI also reports that, " Violence in Iraq’s Diyala River Valley has been slashed in half thanks to citizen volunteers...."