Sometimes larger points can be made in short form...

Michael Ware of CNN and Time magazine has been reporting from Baghdad for some time. Those in support of the Iraq War often do not like his reporting because he is blunt and tells things the way they are. In a short paragraph he hits the so-called fallacy of the Bush "Surge" dead on and makes a point that many will ignore....

Cooper: Where does the so called surge - others would say just escalation, where does it stand? How's it going? Too soon to tell?"

Ware: "Oh, way too soon to tell. But what I can tell you right now that, in terms of Baghdad, if you want to look at it through a microscope without looking at the rest of the country the surge will have an impact. But at the end of the day if America wants to win in Iraq it would need to surge the whole country. But it can't. So what it's done in Baghdad, you're seeing changes in the violence. You hear these politicians saying sectarian murders are down, yes that's true. But at what cost? American deaths are up."

As Ware states, all of Iraq needs a "surge" just not Baghdad. Unfortunately, the US alone does not have the troops to do this (nor do I want to see more in Iraq.)

Here's the link to the video.