Rep. Eliot Engel (D-N.Y.) challenged Gen. Petraeus about the 2004 Washington Post op-ed Petraeus wrote, giving an upbeat portrait of the progress he was making in getting Iraqi troops ready to stand up, so U.S. troops could stand down.

Engel (that’s him at right) asked why we should believe that his relatively optimistic assessment today will turn out to be any more accurate than his relatively optimistic assessment. Since I’ve referred to the op-ed twice, suggesting it stands as a blow to Petraeus’ credibility, it’s only fair I give his reply.

Petraeus thanked Engel for the opportunity defend the piece, because “I stand by it.” He noted that it contained several notes of caution, in which he said there were still many challenges ahead in Iraq. (That’s true, but any honest reading of the whole piece will indicate it communicates a sense of positive momentum that cannot be easily reconciled with the past three years of lack of progress toward the U.S. handoff to Iraqi troops.)

Petraeus also mentioned the Feb. 2006 bombing of the “Golden Dome” in Samarra, which he said was a key turning point in the onset of the Iraqi civil war. President Bush has also relied on the Samarra bombing in explaining to the nation why things turned sour in Iraq.

Cross-posted at Minnesota Monitor.