US opinion on Patraeus

I have been reading the American Press over the weekend ahead of the report from Iraq from General Petraeus.The New York Times in particular has come out with some different opinions.

Its editorial yesterday claimed

"The military commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, is to deliver a report to Congress on Monday that could be the most consequential testimony by a wartime commander in more than a generation. What the country desperately needs is an honest assessment of the war and a clear strategy for extricating American forces from the hopeless spiral of violence in Iraq." It notes that the general has been overly-optimistic in the past.

This was backed up by Damien Cave and Stephen Farrell who claim that

Seven months after the American-led troop “surge” began, Baghdad has experienced modest security gains that have neither reversed the city’s underlying sectarian dynamic nor created a unified and trusted national government.

Micheal Gordon writing on Saturday said

The most comprehensive and up-to-date military statistics show that American forces have made some headway toward a crucial goal of protecting the Iraqi population. Data on car bombs, suicide attacks, civilian casualties and other measures of the bloodshed in Iraq indicate that violence has been on the decline, though the levels generally remain higher than in 2004 and 2005

.

There is also a very good video piece on NYTimes.com which goes on a video tour of Baghdad assessing the security situation in the country .

The Washington post this morning seems to think that the report of Ambassador Crocker may carry more weight.

With little progress to recount in how the Iraqis have used the political "breathing space" that Bush promised his war strategy would create, Crocker's inevitably more nuanced appeal for time and patience is likely to be the tougher sell.

Whilst its editorial yesterday asks for"Accepting Iraqi Reality
Both President Bush and Congress need to adjust to the mixed results of the 'surge.'

First and foremost, President Bush must accept the fact that what he defined as the principal objective of the military offensive, the stimulation of an Iraqi political settlement, has not been achieved.