Success in Iraq

Tim Russert was on the Today show this morning. He was saying that Bush does not want to put any specifics in his plan for Iraq in that if things go well and he does reduce the number of soldiers there he (Bush) will be able to say things got better and his plan was successful. Can it be argue that even if things begin to go better and the number of soldiers is reduced that Bush still did not successed? Could it be argued that the war was a failure or just short of a failure in that the first parameters of the war were a failure? It seems that Bush is only now able to claim a small amount of success in that he has been allowed to change paramaters of the war. At first Bush and his team said that the soldiers would only be in Iraq for a few months. They have now been there for almost three years. In addition, the reasons for going to war have not panned out. Finally, Iraq has not been rebuilt. So even if Bush reduces the number of soldiers in Iraq will it still be a failure?