Let me understand, so the reduction in violence served as the main reason for Bush and others to declare that the surge was succeeding, and yet now with this recent outbreak of fierce fighting they're claiming it's a "byproduct of the success" and a "positive moment."

I see, this recent violence is just an after-effect of all that's good with surge, like a fart after eating a big plate of beans. They'll stop at nothing in spinning any kind of nonsensical gibberish in hopes that it will stick.

Bush continues to prove that he's in an alternate universe:

"By any reasonable measure, the legislative achievements in Baghdad over the past four months have been remarkable," Bush said, acknowledging that more needs to be done.

He pointed to the proliferation of soccer games, community organizations and a 5-kilometer race along once-perilous streets in Anbar province as signs that normalcy is returning.

Legislative achievements? What? Notice Bush doesn't cite any of these achievements, rather shifting to soccer games and marathon races as examples of "normalcy" returning to the country (this despite lack of electricity and water in many parts, but hey, those are just luxuries -- on with the games!).

Tufts University scholar Vali Nasr makes the case that the surge simply postponed the inevitable, given there really hasn't been any political progress made.

"This was expected. It was just a matter of timing," said Vali Nasr, Tufts University scholar and author of the bestselling book, The Shi'a Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future. "The ceasefire and the surge allowed everyone to regroup and rearm. There is still the Shi'a-Sunni conflict. There is still the Sadr-Badr conflict. The surge and the ceasefire merely kept them apart, but there has never been a real political settlement," he said. "No, the big battle for Iraq hasn't been fought yet. The future of Iraq has not been determined." Nasr said the question now remains just how deep U.S. forces will get sucked into a Shi'ite civil war.

Yes, that is the question, to what extent will our forces get sucked into what will likely be a bloody civil war? And what will McCain say about all of this??

To put the tin foil hat on, if things begin to really get bad again in Iraq, will this prove to be an opportune time to wag the dog and turn one's attention to Iran? It's long been rumored that Bush/Cheney adamantly refuse to leave the Iran/nuclear issue to the next president, preferring to deal with it themselves. We shall see.