While honest observers have all along maintained that the surge has not achieved its intended political goals, statistics declassified this week reveal that even the military benefits of the surge have been modest. (In other words, it's a really bad time for The American Interest cover to feature a symposium asking, "Iraq: What if We Win?") The number of insurgent attacks has remained constant since November at about 60 per day, the same level of violence present in the spring of 2005, according to the military's count. An independent tally found that the number of Iraqis killed actually increased over January, which would mark the first spike since June of last year, just after the surge commenced.
What's amazing about the surge is how it led conservatives to make the same mistakes twice. They jumped on the surge to again declare victory prematurely, and to again accuse their liberal brethren of being traitors, even after they were proved so wrong in their predictions of a cakewalk war in 2003 and 2004. Laura Ingraham accused Barbara Walters of actually wanting defeat. Victor Davis Hanson wrote that "When the perception of Iraq changed unexpectedly from an unpopular quagmire to a brilliant recovery, replete with real heroes, the Democrats, like deer in the headlights, were caught frozen." Bill Kristol declared that "What Democrats are doing now is, in effect, denying evident success. And, by continuing to push for a withdrawal timetable, they are trying to prevent further success." Brilliant recovery? It's almost enough to make you wonder if conservatives have good foreign-policy judgment. ---Jordan Michael Smith
