I think in this case, tactical success is being translated into operational success and is establishing the conditions for strategic success - but I don't think it is necessarily manifesting itself in the ways we (the big broad "we") are looking for it.
Rob,

I will have to disagree with that one; we have changed defintions for success and the absolute criterion for that success is ever evolving. We meanwhile keep saying this is a surprise. Exactly what is surprising in that the Sunni tribal leaders chose an alliance of convenience when AQI threatened their pregogatives? And I would ask the same thing about the definition of strategic succeess? An Iraq that is stable? An Iraq that is democratic? Those two are not in my view compatible; to the contrary, they have been antagonistic goals. As for the time required to achieve a "strategic success," saying that it will take a long time merely begs the question of how long is long when time is something extremely short.

I agree on the issue of vital interests: I have yet to see a concise defintion of what those interests are and how they align with Iraq's future. There is too much speculation and hype regarding our future course of action from either side of the debate. And there are larger vital interests which are affected by the war in Iraq, some very much closer to home when it comes to funding choices.

Best

Tom