According to this article, US combat deaths will show a massive decline from the 66 combat deaths from July, 2007. This month’s combat death toll currently sits at 5. To be fair, though, it should be noted that last July, US troops were just getting started with the Surge’s offensive.

With those statistics in mind, we should ask Sen. Obama some questions. Here’s the first question I’d want answered:

Q1: How flexible would your 16 month plan be if Gen. Petraeus said that he didn’t want to lose the gains that the Surge has produced?

Q2: Do you think the Iraq war is winnable? If you don’t think it’s winnable, why not?

Q3: Are you committed to winning in Iraq so that we’ll have a strong, stabilized ally in the heart of the Middle East? If you aren’t committed to winning there, why aren’t you?

Q4: Why is winning in Afghanistan more important than crushing Iran, the Mahdi Army and AQI in Iraq?

Q5: In your opinion, did the Surge put in place the conditions needed for the Anbar Awakening? Did it put in place the conditions needed for political reconciliation? Did it put in place the conditions needed for improved security for the average Iraqi? Did it put in place the conditions needed for economic recovery? If you think that the Surge had nothing to do with any or all of these things, explain why it didn’t have that effect?

Q6: Isn’t it true that you were wrong when predicting that the Surge not only wouldn’t improve conditions in Iraq but that it would make things worse?

Technorati Tags: Obama, Iraq War, Surge, David Petraeus, Anbar Awakening, Reconciliation, National Security, Afghanistan, Iran, Economic Recovery, Commander-in-Chief

Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog