Here's hoping all that is true, that for the first time in a war lasting longer than WWII the right-wing explanation of events is correct.

In the interest of fairness, one must be aware that if Conservatives had ever been correct before the US and Iraq wouldn't be in this situation calling for this analysis and conclusions. And that this isn't the first time we've heard such an analysis, even from people with higher security clearances.

Please explain why one should grand credibility to the optimism of the quoted analysis given previous optimistic comments and the reality.

Cheney: 09/2006 "If we had to do it over again we would do exactly the same thing." (Rice: 03/2006 "I know we've made tactical errors, thousands of them.")

Bush, 05/2006. "We have now reached a turning point in the struggle between freedom and terror." (Department of Defense: 08/2006 "Iraqi casualties increase 42% in three months after this "turning point.")

Cheney, 03/2006. "Q: Do you still believe the insurgency is in its final throes? Cheney: Yes." ("Insurgency remains strong and resilient" —GAO, 9/2006. "... remains potent and viable." —DOD, 8/2006.)

If this were a trial, and so many witnesses had been misleading so many times, would you believe yet one more statement which seemed identical to the previous, demonstrably untrue, statements?

Arf