The following excerpt from a Washinton Post article (consistently hostile to the Bush policy in Iraq) gives some hope about the security situation there now that American troops are cracking down on Shiite Death squads.  Note the bolded sections:

"We stopped a few minutes later at Abbas Mosque, a small Sunni shrine. Sheik Khaled Mohammed al-Ubaidi, dressed in a knitted white prayer cap and a long white robe, came out to greet Abizaid. The general asked if security had improved and the sheik answered: "Thank God, yes!" Now that U.S. forces are going after Shiite death squads, he said, Sunnis here "understand the Americans are serious about the rule of law." (In the past three weeks, the U.S. military has killed about 25 death squad leaders and captured more than 200, according to Thurman.) The cleanup has brought a similar respite to Doura, the second neighborhood we visited. You can still see the pieces of red tape on the front gates of each of the homes that were swept. The murder rate has fallen by 83 percent in August, compared with the 30 days before the crackdown began. For Baghdad overall, the murder rate has dropped 41 percent this month. What does the new battle of Baghdad tell us? I'm still mulling the answer, but my sense is that it's something we already knew: With enough troops and aggressive tactics, American forces can bring order to even the meanest streets. But it's only the Iraqis themselves who can stabilize these neighborhoods permanently. I'm sure about one thing: Iraqi leaders need to do what Abizaid did yesterday -- escape the artificial world of the Green Zone and get back on these streets, where they can begin to lead by example. "

There will certainly be surges of violence, but maybe there is hope that they can take control of Baghdad from the different terror groups.

We can only hope.

sharp

This is shaping up as a nail-biter. What looked at one time to be a potential Democratic sweep has the potential to be the mother of all opportunities missed.   Recent trends may just be the normal tightening of races as folks begin to pay attention (about 1/3 say they are paying attention now) or they may have more to do with recent terror threats and foiled plans.  Here is my breakdown of interesting races.

In PA, Rick Santorum has come from 18 points behind to 6 points behind in a couple of months. He's running against the notoriously poor finishing Bob Casey - whose father was a popular Governor. The memorable thing to me about his father was that he was denied a TV spot at the Democratic convention because he was pro-life. This Bob Casey led Ed Rendell by 20 points in his race for the Democratic nomination for Governor before losing by 14.  I predict some late night vote counting and a razor-thin Casey victory and Democratic pick-up.

In TN, the graceful but untested Harold Ford has a good campaign going to replace Republican Majority leader Bill Frist, but he keeps having his political family members convicted, hurled out of office for corruption, etc. This is not new to the Ford family in TN. They are part of the Memphis machine. And he will lose in November as the pro-life Republicans hold their noses and vote for Bob Corker, the former Chattanooga mayor.

In MO, Republican Senator Talent has pulled ahead by the slightest of margins. He barely won last time and has generally trailed in this campaign. But now he's ahead and he will win. 

In MT, the unthinkable could happen and Conrad Burns - perpetually the most endangered of Republican Senators - could win. He's pulled ahead of his rivals in a recent poll. This is one the Democrats had written in with ink. Hide the sharp objects if you're married to a lefty.

In MN, Mark Kennedy is very close to his Democratic rivals in a state that has trended more and more Republican with each recent election. The press claims his ties to President Bush will sink him, but he's in the thick of it, and I give him a slight edge based on the undercurrents in Minnesota.

In FL, the only thing that would make this one interesting would be if Jeb Bush got on the ballot as a write-in candidate. Democratic Senator Nelson holds this one. The former astronaut stays in Washington.

In VA, Democrats are always hopeful and sometimes even win - as with the recent governors race. But not this time. Juvenile behavior will intesify as hopes rise, but George Allen is a popular and effective Senator and will remain. Republican hold.

In RI, the race is fascinating. if Republicans win, it simply means one more vote for majority leader. Other than that, Democrats already hold this seat. I predict Democrats pick up this seat and wind up with less of a gain than it seems like on election night. 

In WA, there is a chance that Democrats lose their 2nd Senate seat as Maria Cantwell is struggling against Republican Mike McGavick. This loss would be devastating to Democrats and would almost ensure that the next President would have a Republican led Senate for their full first term. Democrats have to win this one. I predict they will pull it out in the end.

Altogether, I look for Democrats to gain two seats in the Senate and the new totals to be 54-46.

Still, however unthinkable only weeks ago, the Democrats could actually lose Senate seats this fall.

sharp

What a bad day to be a member of that terrorist group.

And do you ever wonder why they fight with guns at all? They must be the ones who are chicken to load up their 1970 Rambler with tnt and head to the local place of worship. Those 71 could have killed a lot more people worshiping God if they weren't so chicken.

So I guess 71 chicken Islamic extremists were killed in Southern Afghanistan. Probably don't get virgins for that.

sharp

James Baker III, former Secretary of State for Bush I, had strongly advised the President not to go into Iraq alone or with one or two countries.  He said that if we go we must have enough support and enough troops to do the job.  He had also warned against the devolution into chaos from the Sunni-Shiite hatred.

Maybe they should have listened.

Now they have another chance.

Baker is leading a bipartisan commission which is putting together a strategy for Iraq.  More than stay-the-course and certainly not surrender and apologize, this commission's advice should be heeded by the President.

One thing we all learn the hard way is that everyone's a genius until you judge the results of their recommendations.  Baker has been right on Iraq and, so far, the Bush State department has not.

I find myself pretty close to Hillary Clinton's position on the war.  I think it was absolutely the right thing to go into Iraq and I think it's been botched to the tune of many lost lives since then.  Not that I could have done any better.  Not that she could have done any better.  No one knows.  But the one who was tested and succeeded in 1991 and was then proven right again with his 2002 advice was James Baker III.

Left and right politics aside, it's time to get this thing right and get the boys and girls home.  It's time for the administration to take some advice.

sharp

With reports of Iran funneling weapons today to Hezbollah to rearm them for another assault on Israel, can there really be peace in Lebanon?

Many other countries hate America for our aggressive attitude towards fighting terror (Bush's approach that any country that sponsors terrorism is the enemy).

But no one has put forward a better approach to fighting terrorism than to take the fight to them.  The alternative is most certainly to fight them here on our soil. 

While I feel terribly for the innocient people of Lebanon and the innocent Palestinian people, if you support a government that supports terrorism, you will certainly pay a steep price.  Live by the sword and die by the sword.  (I understand many apply this to America and are correct to a degree, in my opinion.)

But the approach of building a coalition of European partners to solve problems overlooks the fact that they simply want us to do it for them.  When left to their devices you get Iranian-like delays and broken promises - all the while arming Hezbollah with rockets to fire into Israel.  And the Lebanese people gained nothing in that fight.  Only the Iranians gained.

There can't be peace in Lebanon or anywhere else until America does what Bush said in the first place - takes the fight to the countries that sponsor terror.  And most of the rest of the world is part of the problem, not the solution.

sharp