He acknowledges the success of the surge without acknowleding he opposed it, clings to the assertion we can withdraw troops within 16 months, says we need to discuss the differences in positions on Iraq, and calls for leaving an unknown number of troops behind to fight Al Qaeda in “Mesopotamia”.

First, the surge. Here’s what he says in the Times:

In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness.

Which is interesting, considering that this is what he had to say when the plan was proposed.

“We can send 15,000 more troops, 20,000 more troops, 30,000 more troops: I don’t know any expert on the region or any military officer that I’ve spoken to privately that believes that that is going to make a substantial difference on the situation on the ground.”

He moves on to the time frame of withdrawal:

We can safely redeploy our combat brigades at a pace that would remove them in 16 months.

The brigades? Sure. Their heavy equipment, on the other hand, will be left behind. As ABC News has already discovered by actually asking the commanders on the ground, there is “no way” the 16-month withdrawal time frame could work logistically. Senator Obama must know more about moving equipment, washing it to meet regulations, and shipping it back than the military does.

Moving onward, he repeats his call for residual forces in the country:

After this redeployment, a residual force in Iraq would perform limited missions: going after any remnants of Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia, protecting American service members and, so long as the Iraqis make political progress, training Iraqi security forces. That would not be a precipitous withdrawal.

Which is where he’s really screwy. First of all, how many forces is he talking about? He never specifies. Second, I thought that Iraq wasn’t really a central point in the war on terror. If even he is forced to adopt a policy of leaving troops behind to fight Al Qaeda, wouldn’t that make it kind of a central point? Our main enemy is Al Qaeda and he acknowledges enough of a presence to warrant troops staying behind. Third, how many people call Iraq “Mesopotamia”? Iraqis tend to call it, believe it or not, “Iraq”. The only people I know who are calling it “Mesopotamia” are the insurgents.