[BILBONDER]

Ben, once again you are making a strawman argument. No one has said things have not improved at all or that the surge is having no effect. Civilian deaths have declined. Thank you for admitting that the surge is working.

What people are questioning is exactly how low civilian deaths need to go in order for it to be declared a shining example of success I would say they are already there. Next question?

Why is it you refuse to recognize this fact? The truth is of the 18 benchmarks the White House agreed would be used to measure the success of the surge only 3 have been accomplished. I've seen the document, and that's NOT their conclusion. Do I need to cut and paste from there, or is it enough that you take me at my word? Your choice?

Now the White House is saying they don't want to use those 18 benchmarks any more and that smells like they are changing the definition of what qualifies as a success so that they can declare victory even though they failed to accomplish their own benchmarks. First off, the 18 benchmarks were for the success of the Iraq rebuild in general, not the surge.

Secondly, the benchmarks, many of them have absolutely nothing to do with the surge, one of the ones which has failed so far, is the one about the readiness of the Iraqi forces, which has already been noted.

Of the 18, most of them have been substantially fulfilled, if you actually read the document, it lists both the things in degrees, to which they have succeeded.

Has the surge succeeded entirely? No. Has the surge been successful? Yes. Has the reconstruction of Iraq finished? No. Will it go through, yes. How long will it take? I don't know. Should the troops stay until the benchmarks are totally finished? Yes. Is the surge a failure if at this present time not all the benchmarks are fulfilled? No.