3 surprises awaiting Obama in Iraq

Sen. John McCain played advanced political chess back and forth this past week with Sen. Barack Obama over the war in Iraq. Because the Democratic presidential hopeful had been to Iraq only once more than two years ago, McCain said he had a "profound misunderstanding" about the present status of Iraqi war progress.

Obama lashed back saying that he didn't understand how McCain could be so naïve to back a war based upon "failed" strategies and policies. McCain fired back again, "To say that we failed in Iraq and we're not succeeding does not comport with the facts on the ground, so we've got to show him the facts on the ground." So McCain invited Obama to visit Iraq with him. Obama refused, saying he would plan his own trip.

The fact is, John McCain is absolutely right. Barack doesn't have a clue what is really going on in Iraq. And he's about to eat some humble military pie, if and when he goes there. I have been to Iraq twice to visit the troops since Obama's single visit. And I personally can assure him that he is in for a rude awakening when he goes. The way I see it, he's going to face at least three major surprises.

Surprise No. 1: The surge really did work

When I went to Iraq the first time in November 2006, I went with the same misconceptions that most Americans had at the time: Iraq was a mess, the country was out of control and our troops were facing a slaughter field of insurgency on every front. There's no doubt our troops were facing grave obstacles, and too many were dying, but it was still not as negative as it was painted by our media at the time.

TRENDING: 2 top newspapers disregard leftist colleagues to endorse Trump

On my second trip to Iraq in September 2007, I was honored again to travel with Gen. Bob Magnus, Lt. Gen. James Amos and aides Col. Pete Vercruysse, Maj. Mike Olness and Maj. Dan Shipley. When we arrived, we split up into two teams with the purpose of covering more of the country's territory to encourage the troops. For a week, I was transported around the Al Anbar province and beyond, from Fallujah to the furthest western border of Iraq with Syria, and from Al Qa'im to Ali al Salem in Kuwait. Most bases we visited several hours and some overnight, talking and eating with the troops. Some had several thousand troops at them, and others were in remote locations with only a few hundred.

In the two trips to Iraq, I visited 28 bases and shook hands with nearly 40,000 troops. I cannot express the profound pride I feel for our troops. It was an experience I will remember for the rest of my life.

One thing that was absolutely apparent in my second visit to Iraq was how well the surge was working. Despite that not one major media at the time reported the positive impact of the surge in summer 2007, I had seen it for my own eyes and could compare the progress between my two visits in more than two dozen locations around the country (many of which were hot beds of gunfire the year before).

As we approach summer 2008, few deny anymore that the surge worked. Last May marked the lowest levels of deaths in the five years of the war. And Obama is just about to find out how true that is if he visits Iraq, and as he listens to intelligence reports, talks with military officers, walks freely and safely in bustling market places, is thanked by Iraqi civilians for America's intervention and jokes with the troops and Iraqi officers.

Surprise No. 2: War is not reflected accurately in the news

Bar none, I was shocked by the progress made between my two visits to Iraq. So much so that in the midst of my second tour around the country I contacted the press from Fallujah to report two aspects about the war: "the surge is working" and "morale is up – way up!"

That was not popular news back in August or September 2007. About the only three people saying those types of statements were John McCain, President Bush and Gen. Petraeus. Remember how the general's military report to Congress was being mocked by media at the time? "Gen. Betray-Us"?

Late night comedy even ridiculed my brief report from Iraq, when Jay Leno told his audience: "Chuck Norris is over in Iraq visiting the troops. Today, Chuck said the troop surge is working. Keep in mind, this is the same guy that said the whole Total Gym thing works, too. So, I don't know." Of course, I wasn't bothered by Leno's comments, because I knew he was joking. (Just wait until I meet him face to face – just kidding, Jay!). Most of all, despite what media was feeding Americans, I experienced the truth. The surge was working, and morale was way up. That leads me to a few important questions.

So where does Obama get his facts about the war? How is it that he can so confidently conclude that the Iraq war is futile and a result of failed strategy and policies? And if he hasn't been to Iraq since the surge even started, how can he boldly say anything about the battlefields?

The truth is that Obama gets his knowledge about the war from the same places most of us do – the media, White House press reports, so-called military experts (who are often no longer on the battlefields), our favorite blogs and websites, etc. But are we truly getting all the facts about the war from those sources?

Imagine what our military officers and few political leaders who really understand the ins and outs of the war think when those "on the outside" pontificate about their knowledge of the war. Have you ever had someone try to tell you what it's like to be in your shoes and be dead wrong? Do we expect that our military leaders are honestly going to tell media representatives all the truths about the war so that CNN can splash them around the globe for all the terrorists to hear? If our military leaders actually found WMDs or knew where Osama bin Laden was actually hidden, are we really so slow to figure out why they could not and would not tell the public? If it's true that we can't judge a book by its cover, do we think we can judge a war by its news coverage? Does Obama?

Surprise No. 3: All of our service men and women are absolutely amazing heroes

Considering how Obama has spoken negatively about the war, for which our troops and their families daily sacrifice, one might think he would experience a cold military reception in Iraq. But those poised souls are much bigger than that. If Obama goes to Iraq, they will offer him the honor and respect he could never give them. As a possible commander in chief, they deserve his greatest admiration. But how can he march them forward when he rejects their cause, has not sat down with their officers and generals and wants to negotiate with Muslim terrorists?

Whatever the reasons we went in, we're there now. We can fight the constitutional correctness until the cows come home, but our troops are there. And they are fighting for the freedom and democracy of more than 12,000,000 Iraqis who courageously went to the polls a few years ago to establish a new constitution and government. I am humbled by their sacrifice, grateful for their service and amazed by their courage. And I believe even Obama will be surprised by their fortitude, if he just opens his eyes.

Our troops will triumph and the world will eventually see a stable Iraq in which the people are free from tyranny. And who will we all thank in that day? Not Barack Obama. But all those brave service men and women who fight with the patriotic passion of Thomas Paine, who rallied the revolutionary troops in 1776 through his now famous "The Crisis," with these words:

These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country, but he that stands it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph.