Troop 'surge' gains ground

Donkey,

Report after report is confirming that the recent troop surge of 30,000 American troops is achieving its objectives in Iraq. Casualties are at their lowest levels in years, and coalition forces are actually weeding out al Qaeda in Iraq from their strongholds in Baghdad.

Yet things haven't always looked so encouraging. When President Bush announced the troop surge earlier this year, Democrats were vehemently opposed. Let's remember some of their kind words on the matter.

-Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich criticized the new strategy claiming that the new plan could cause a war with Iran. 

-Chuck Hagel, Delaware Democrat Joe Biden (Senate Foreign Relations Committee chair), and Michigan Democrat Carl Levin (Armed Services Committee) chair co-sponsored a non-binding resolution that says it is “not in the national interest of the United States to deepen its military involvement in Iraq.” 

-After three days of debate, on February 16, 2007 the House of Representatives (a democratically controlled body) passed House Concurrent Resolution (HCR) 63 on a vote of 246 to 182.[29] The resolution states:
Congress and the American people will continue to support and protect the members of the United States Armed Forces who are serving or who have served bravely and honorably in Iraq; and
Congress disapproves of the decision of President George W. Bush announced on January 10, 2007, to deploy more than 20,000 additional United States combat troops to Iraq.

Now, 10 months later, we have the benefit of hindsight, and as one senator suggested, "You would have to suspend disbelief to believe that the surge is not working."

Donkey, what's your response to the progress being made in Iraq? Perhaps you were for the surge when it was announced. But if not, how do you justify the progress? It seems the Democrat's anti-Bush rhetoric is coming back to bite them, and that bite is going to have more sting for your party if things continue on the rebound. 

-Elephant