Yesterday, I linked to Betrayus and Crock o'shit's Charts(12 charts)(pdf). Well the WaPo took a look at them and called them out on their BS and their blatant manipulation of the facts...

Looking at the critical "Iraqi Combat Battalion Generation" chart (#11)

WHAT IT SHOWS: The number of Iraqi combat battalions, particularly those "capable of taking the lead," has steadily grown.

ANALYSIS: This chart uses imprecise language to suggest an improvement in the capability of Iraqi forces when there may well be little or no improvement.

Only a small sliver of the battalions, perhaps 10 or 12, are rated at the top category of operational readiness (green in the chart). But the diagram reaches part of the way into the group of third-level readiness battalions (orange in the chart) to achieve its total of "112 battalions in the lead." By definition, none of those battalions should be capable -- and in his testimony, Petraeus acknowledged that even the best of these troops still need logistical assistance from the United States.

Moving on to the "Ethno-Sectarian Violence" chart(#4)...

WHAT IT SHOWS: This chart combines maps of Baghdad's ethnic neighborhoods with density plots of ethno-sectarian killings to show that violence has declined significantly from December 2006 to last month.

ANALYSIS: Hidden beneath many of the density plots are colors that show a major reshaping of Baghdad, from an ethnically mixed city to a patchwork of rival ethnic and religious enclaves whose residents rarely intersect outside their gated communities.

Many analysts, including in the U.S. government, believe that this de facto division of Baghdad -- as opposed to brilliant U.S. counterinsurgency work -- is largely responsible for the decline in violence.

"The polarization of communities is most evident in Baghdad, where the Shia are a clear majority in more than half of all neighborhoods and Sunni areas have become surrounded by predominately Shia districts," said the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq last year. "Where population displacements have led to significant sectarian separation, conflict levels have diminished to some extent."

On the Iraqi Security Forces Expenditures(#12)

WHAT IT SHOWS: This chart, showing steadily rising Iraqi security expenditures and lower U.S. expenditures, suggests that the Iraqis are beginning to pick up much of the tab for their own security.

ANALYSIS: The lines on this chart through 2008 closely track the Iraqi budget and previous testimony by U.S. officials. The figures for 2009 appear to be based on guesswork, and Petraeus's office declined to provide supporting information. But all the data are so oddly defined that the comparison is not meaningful.

The Iraqi expenditures reflect the budget for running the Interior and Defense ministries, meaning that at least half of the amount is salaries for soldiers and police. The numbers have increased because the personnel in those ministries has skyrocketed in recent years.

The U.S. expenditures are just for the Iraq Security Forces Fund, which provides for the training and equipping of Iraqi forces; the line on the chart does not include the billions of dollars spent on the salaries of U.S. troops assisting the Iraqis and the cost of the extensive logistics that the U.S. military provides to Iraqi forces.

When the Government Accountability Office last year asked for the total-cost figure, the Defense Department said it could not provide an estimate.

Don't you love it when the truth comes out! There is one House critter that caught my eye today, Rep. Robert Wexler...

WEXLER: Please tell us, General, what is winning?

PETRAEUS: Well, first of all -- first of all, Congress, let me tell you that what we are fighting for is national interest. It is interest that, as I stated, have to do with Al Qaida, a sworn enemy of the United States and the free world; it has to do with the possible spread of sectarian conflict in Iraq, conflict that had engulfed that country and had it on the bring of civil war; it has to do with region stability of a region that is of critical importance to the global economy; and it has to do with, certainly, the influence of Iran, another, obviously, very important element in that region.

In terms of what it is that we are trying to achieve, I think, simply, it is a country that is at piece with itself and its neighbors. It is a country that can defend itself, that has a government that is reasonably representative and broadly responsive to its citizens, and a country that is involved in, engaged in, again, the global economy.
Ambassador Crocker and I, for what it's worth, have typically seen ourselves as minimalists. We're not after the Holy Grail in Iraq, we're not after Jeffersonian democracy; we're after conditions that would allow our soldiers to disengage, and that is, in fact, what we are doing as we achieve progress, as we have with the surge, and that is what is indeed allowing us to withdraw the surge forces -- again, well over one-quarter of our ground combat power, five of 20 brigade combat teams, plus two Marine battalions and the Marine Expeditionary Unit by the end of July.

Ambassador Crocker and I, for what it's worth, have typically seen ourselves as minimalists. We're not after the Holy Grail in Iraq, we're not after Jeffersonian democracy; we're after conditions that would allow our soldiers to disengage, and that is, in fact, what we are doing as we achieve progress, as we have with the surge, and that is what is indeed allowing us to withdraw the surge forces -- again, well over one-quarter of our ground combat power, five of 20 brigade combat teams, plus two Marine battalions and the Marine Expeditionary Unit by the end of July.

Okay, no Holy Grail, no Jeffersonian Democracy, no Saddam, no WMD... WTF?