Framing the Iraq Debate

Don't play into their hands.  For years now, the Bush administration has confused the American public by combining wars.  We've been fighting Sunnis, Shiites, insurgents, Al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Iranian influence, etc.... If you want to call it a Global War, then fine let's do that.  But let's get one thing straight (I'm talking to you Harry Reid, and the rest of the Dems)--we won the war in Iraq.   We have captured and killed Sadam, we've defeated his army, helped them create a constitution, etc.  Need further proof  that we won?  How's this:

THE PRESIDENT: Thank you all very much. Admiral Kelly, Captain Card, officers and sailors of the USS Abraham Lincoln, my fellow Americans: Major combat operations in Iraq have ended. In the battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed.

So when Harry Reid claims we have lost, he's not framing the argument correctly.  What he should have said is that the current Bush strategy for post-Iraq rebuilding has failed.  He should have said the Bush strategy for post-Iraq security has failed.  He should have said the post-Iraq occupation is ill-conceived and needs to end.  The Iraqi government and Iraqis in general need to fight for their country and determine their own course.  

By claiming that we have lost in Iraq, Reid is playing into his opponents' hands, allowing them to say he (and all Dems by association) are soft on terror, blah blah blah.  It's time to reframe this debate, and tell the truth.  We won the war in Iraq, and now it's time to stop wasting our resources and work with our allies in breaking up terrorist groups in North Africa, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Syria