Based on two MSM news reports [one ABC, one NPR], Eric Dondero has declared the so-called war on terror to be essentially won in Iraq and Afghanistan, while chiding the left-wing libertarian media for ignoring the story.
The problem, as usual, is that Eric has his facts ... wrong.
If the war in Iraq had been essentially won, then it would behoove somebody to explain why Generals Petraeus and Odierno think that we cannot safely get out of the country:
Petraeus, Gates, and Odierno had hoped to sell Obama on a plan that they formulated in the final months of the Bush administration that aimed at getting around a key provision of the U.S.-Iraqi withdrawal agreement signed envisioned re-categorizing large numbers of combat troops as support troops. That subterfuge was by the United States last November while ostensibly allowing Obama to deliver on his campaign promise....
The opening argument by the Petraeus-Odierno faction against Obama's withdrawal policy was revealed the evening of the Jan. 21 meeting when retired Army Gen. Jack Keane, one of the authors of the Bush troop surge policy and a close political ally and mentor of Gen. Petraeus, appeared on the NewsHour with Jim Lehrer to comment on Obama's pledge on Iraq combat troop withdrawal.
Keane, who had certainly been briefed by Petraeus on the outcome of the Oval Office meeting, argued that implementing such a withdrawal of combat troops would "increase the risk rather dramatically over the 16 months." He asserted that it would jeopardize the "stable political situation in Iraq" and called that risk "not acceptable."...
Keane, the Army vice-chief of staff from 1999 to 2003, has ties to a network of active and retired four-star Army generals, and since Obama's Jan. 21 order on the 16-month withdrawal plan, some of the retired four-star generals in that network have begun discussing a campaign to blame Obama's troop withdrawal from Iraq for the ultimate collapse of the political "stability" that they expect to follow U.S. withdrawal, according to a military source familiar with the network's plans.
As for Eric's little NPR source on the supposed devastation of Al Qaeda in Pakistan [when, by the way, Eric, did NPR become a relevant source for military commentary--when they started agreeing with you?], it is belied by that far less credible military source--the Pentagon:
Meanwhile, the Pentagon released a long-awaited study Monday describing crumbling security and a peak in violence in Afghanistan in spring and summer of 2008.
You see, the problem in Afghanistan and Pakistan is no longer merely Al Qaeda. The problem is that our massive military intervention has failed to crush the Taliban (SecDef Gates himself sees multiple years ahead and the probable need for negotiations with the Taliban--not something you do with an enemy on the verge of being wiped out), we have nearly reached a decision to stop supporting Harmid Karzai (which is driving him into the arms of India and Iran); and we have completed the de-stabilization of Pakistan, helping the Indian sub-continent lurch along toward yet another war over Kashmir and other unresolved issues.
If you actually read, Eric, you can find the information here, here, here, and here.
Sorry if these articles use actual data and that makes your head explode, Eric.
The reason that actual libertarian blogs aren't covering the so-called victories in Iraq and Afghanistan is simple: they haven't happened.