Democrats should admit they were wrong about surge

Washington Times Editorial:

It may not be "Mission accomplished," but we are getting closer. Yesterday, the United States completed the process of withdrawing from Iraq's cities. American forces closed or turned over to Iraqi authorities 150 bases and facilities. The Iraqis are happy to see us go, and we are glad to be leaving.

The pullout is more proof of the effectiveness of the surge strategy adopted in early 2007 over vociferous Democratic objections, particularly from then-Sen. Barack Obama and then-Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who now ironically direct our foreign policy.

The timeline for the urban withdrawal was codified in the Status of Forces Agreement signed by the George W. Bush administration in November 2008. It committed "all U.S. combat forces" to "withdraw from Iraqi cities, villages and towns ... no later than June 30, 2009" and all forces whatever to be out of the country by Dec. 31, 2011. This makes the Obama pullout plan seem somewhat redundant, but in any case, the departure was made possible because the surge succeeded in reducing violence in the country. Had we left precipitously in 2007, as the Democrats demanded, the debate would be whether Iraq was an American victory or a Vietnam-style defeat.

...

The Democrats should have to admit they showed poor judgment in opposing the surge. It is unfortunate that they have not had to pay a political price for being so wrong about a matter of national security. The events of yesterday are just another reminder of how wrong they were. When you consider the alternative they suggested of a humiliating retreat and a victory for al Qaeda it is still a wonder that voters have any confidence in them whatsoever.

Dominic Milner describes life in Iraq for the troops since the surge.