Schoomaker on Iraq: "We're not losing."

If the generals are this optimistic....

It seemed like a routine question, one that military leaders involved in prosecuting the war in Iraq must ask themselves with some regularity: Is the U.S. winning?.....

During a Capitol Hill briefing for an audience mostly of congressional aides, Schoomaker paused for more than 10 seconds after he was asked the question — lips pursed and brow furrowed — before venturing:

"I think I would answer that by telling you I don't think we're losing." ....

"The challenge … is becoming more complex, and it's going to continue to be," Schoomaker mused. "That's why I'll tell you I think we're closer to the beginning than we are to the end of all this."

Also: I took a stab at analyzing Iraqi troop readiness awhile back, but those numbers were largely Pentagon estimates based on "trained" Iraqis and didn't really take desertions into account. Iraqis who have been trained, but desert, are classified into categories 3 or 4.

RAMADI, Iraq - Their televised graduation was supposed to be a moment of national celebration: A class of 1,000 Sunni Arab soldiers emerging from basic training would show Iraqis that the country's worsening religious divide was not afflicting the national army. Two months later, only about 300 of them have reported for duty, U.S. officials say.

Lastly, I'm not a tactician, so I don't know, but I found interesting Rumsfeld's revelation that there are 55,000 American troops in the Baghdad area up from 40,000, with only 8,000 "patrolling the streets of the city along with Iraqi security forces in what has so far proven an unsuccessful crackdown by the new government to restore security." (I'm not clear whether that's 8,000 patrolling with Iraqis, or only 8,000 patrolling the streets of Baghdad.)

General Casey says we may need still more US troops in Baghdad.