"I believe that we will be able to reduce our forces to the pre-surge level ... by next summer without jeopardizing the security gains we have fought so hard to achieve." ...
Petraeus said the withdrawal of the Marine unit would be followed in mid-December with the departure of an Army brigade numbering 3,500 to 4,000 soldiers.
After that, another four brigades would be withdrawn by July 2008, he said. That would leave the United States with about 130,000 troops in Iraq.
War critics continue to conflate measuring the surge with measuring the war.
A successful surge does not mean the war is over. General Casey rightly notes that the effect of more troops in Iraq is temporary:
The decrease in violence in Iraq caused by the infusion of 30,000 additional American troops is only "a temporary tactical effect," limited to those neighborhoods and streets where the troops are located, the Army's chief of staff said Monday.
Absent significant political reconciliation among Iraq's competing Sunni, Shia and Kurdish populations, the "surge" strategy is unlikely to have a broader influence on security in Iraq, said Army Gen. George W. Casey, at a breakfast in Washington hosted by Government Executive. But he added he is skeptical that such progress will be made, citing numerous earlier opportunities squandered by Iraqi leaders.
This reflects my worries about a simple increase in troops.
I wanted metrics that judge the surge and not the war as a whole. As such, I wanted specific surge metrics that measure the surge and not something as dangerous as casualties for a metric.
We appear to have gotten lucky. Not only are the military goals being met, but civilian casualties have dropped.
The war will go on after the surge and we must be prepared to wage it next year and the year after in whatever form it takes until we win.
