Britain's Independent newspaper had the harshest words for the situation in Iraq, saying that the latest increase in US troops "was never truly about stabilizing Iraq. The US had already lost the ability to control events on the ground when the troops began to pour in earlier this year. Its primary purpose was to stave off demands from Democrats and some Republicans for a timetable for a US troop withdrawal. This is cynical and disgraceful. But what else can we expect from a military adventure that was formed in a spirit of hubris and carried out in an atmosphere of crashing incompetence and reckless arrogance? The US-led occupation of Iraq is unraveling in the same morally compromised manner in which it began."

Zurich's Tages-Anzeiger wrote that only a miracle could salvage the situation in Iraq now. "In essence, George W. Bush's vision of a democratic and secure Iraq has probably failed," it wrote. "Under the best of circumstances, the president can hope for an 'honorable peace' like Richard Nixon in Vietnam…The Capitol hearings give the president…a window of about six months; after that, at least five brigades will have to be withdrawn without replacement. Unless a political miracle happens in Baghdad in the meantime, the regime in Tehran will emerge as the victor of Bush's war because of its increased influence in Iraq -- and this without having spent half a trillion dollars, like Washington's warlord has."

Vienna's conservative daily Die Presse meanwhile cautioned people to remain open-minded about the possibility for improvement in Iraq. "It's true: When the creator of the Iraq fiasco, the American president, talks about 'signs of progress' after a quick visit to Iraq, the highest level of skepticism is called for. This disastrous war that he started with lies will become his darkest chapter in history books in the future… But when independent reporters conclude after extensive research in the country that the security situation in several parts has improved, that the cooperation between Americans, Sunni leaders and Iraqi security forces gets better and better -- because the insurgents have gone too far with their anarchic terror against civilians -- one should listen very carefully."

German business daily Handelsblatt agreed that any calming of the situation represents progress. "But compared to the original goals to turn Iraq into a democratic role model for the Middle East, the bar has been lowered dramatically. Washington now talks about a gentle division, about a Sunnistan, Shiistan and Kurdistan, as if this would already signify a happy ending for Iraq. If there's the slightest chance to prevent Iraq from collapsing, it has to be pursued -- no matter who will profit in terms of party politics in the US."

And the Berliner Zeitung newspaper wrote that it's virtually impossible for Bush to withdraw troops at this point. "There's no more talk about President Bush's intention to bring democracy to Iraq and have it serve as an example for the Arab and Islamic world. The only thing that matters now is what American soldiers can do to prevent a murderous civil war in the battered country, and whether they will continue to fight clan leaders and terrorists or withdraw and leave Iraqis to deal with their own fate. President Bush cannot approve a swift withdrawal, because this would not only symbolize a complete failure of his policy, but also make him responsible for a dangerous change of power relations in the Middle East."