<p>
</p>
<p>That’s nice. How is it relevant though?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yep. He’s wrong. Most experts agree that it was the surge that allowed such progress to be made-</p>
<p>[Events</a> in Iraq muddle candidates’ differences](<a href=“http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/21/MND712SFN8.DTL&feed=rss.news]Events”>http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/09/21/MND712SFN8.DTL&feed=rss.news)</p>
<p>[Pentagon:</a> Violence down in Iraq since ‘surge’ - CNN.com](<a href=“http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/06/23/iraq.security/index.html]Pentagon:”>Pentagon: Violence down in Iraq since 'surge' - CNN.com)</p>
<p>Dropping from 100+ US troop deaths per month before the surge to 8 in July is pretty damn good progress.</p>