Preview! 
I repeat, the phrase in question is: “major combat operations.” As in large-scale airstrikes, coordinated attacks involving large numbers of troops and columns of tanks, etc. That phase of the operation, which had the potential for large-scale casualties and goofs (If a significant part of the Iraqi militray had fought, if a bomb had missed and hit an apartment building, if a chemical weapon was launched agianst massed US troops, etc) was over, and had passed without catastrophe. Ample cause for congratulating the troops, IMO.
Soldiers being killed in twos in threes is a bad and serious situation, but it is not “major combat operations.”
Probably so; I was simply pointing out that noxious regimes do not go as quietly as you suggested.
There were plenty of warnings that Iraq would attack Israel, that there would be a massive refugee crisis with starvation, that they would blow up all the oil wells like in '91, that Baghdad would be Stalingrad, that the people would rise up with women and children charging tanks, that we’d end up causing a half-million civilian casualties, etc. I invite you to look over the many many threads on these boards, or for that matter read the thousands of newspaper editorials where many people made many predictions about what would happen. Please tell me how many were spot-on. By and large, the administration’s predictions have been more accurate than most (not all) others.
I’d agree that the task there is more difficult, and difficult in some different ways than was anticipated. But that is the nature of military affairs. “No plan survives first contact with the enemy” is a military cliche because it’s true. Things ALWAYS go wrong, the plan NEVER works perfectly, as any military man will tell you. All you can do is try to eliminate the worst possible outcomes (listed above) and set yourself up so you are prepared to be flexible.
There are many signs that it could go to hell, but there are also signs it could come out pretty good. I read a lot of blogs from military guys’ over there, and they seem cautiously optimistic. Will that hold up? Dunno. Kinda worried myself. But Monday-morning quarterbacking where we start with assumption that our leaders are evil does noone any good.
I was pointing out that your sentence was pretty much word-for-word what the admin has said on several occasions. Major combat operations in Iraq are done. The overall WOT will continue in other ways for years. Wrongheaded, maybe. Dishonest, no.
I don’t claim to know … it seems simply the most logical explanation. Commanders send out soldiers when they think it is necessary (and yes, sometimes they are wrong). That does not mean they are indifferent to the troops’ safety; on the contrary, if they are human at all, they are even more worried than the average citizen.