The news out of Iraq is better. For that one can be thankful. And it's probably a good idea to keep several things in mind.

The "news" about Iraq from Washington and Baghdad is the same as it's always been. No change in the rhetoric. "Improving." "Last throes." Over 5 years of the same stuff. With an election cycle coming along Petraeus knows that both good news and reducing troop strength will help McCain. In the past the "good news" has come as much from jiggering statistics, leaving out categories, as any real improvement in the situation.

And much of the good news in the past has been dependent upon Sadr standing down more than any military success. The reality is that Americans are not safe in the country, it is occupied by troops who must ride in armored vehicles, Americans even in the "Green Zone" must stay inside their bunkers or wear flak jackets and helmets. That's not a sign of a winning situation. Iraqis in the past have been credited with "leading" attacks when either they didn't or they were Kurds attacking Sunnis.

The puppet government isn't functional as a government and needs an occupying foreign military to remain in power. Basic services for Iraqis such as power and clean water are worse than under Saddam.

A blip is not a trend, and when one realizes how that blip is created and measured, and against what background that blip is measured, the situation in Iraq can only be described as lost. And for good.

That's my perspective from watching and reading many of the same things you do, I'm sure. Simply honest differences in the way the information is evaluated.

Arf