Republicans take Mixon's remarks the wrong way

Republican bloggers, such as this one, see the recent remarks by Army Maj. Gen. Benjamin R. "Randy" Mixon that he needs more troops in Diyala as some kind of proof that the surge is working. These guys are really desperate for good news, so they have to spin it themselves. NBC reported on Mixon's remarks, in which he basically said he was being overrun. However, this key phrase was included in the report:

“Ironically, the recent surge into Baghdad drove insurgents and terrorist out of the capital and into Diyala province…”

Ok, there we have it, kids. Proof the surge is working. Yep, because the Bad Guys (whoever they are) are moving out of Baghdad and into another area where the heat isn't on, that means it's all worthwhile. This is pretty much what Petraeus himself has warned about: You apply pressure in one area, and the problem moves to another area (his "balloon" analogy). This is good news? It means that all we have to do is apply the 'surge' to the whole country and the "terrorists" will go someplace else. Where? Afghanistan, maybe? The U.S? Well, let's not use our critical thinking skills when we have a perfect opportunity to rail against "liberal media bias". It's taken us five months to scrape the troops up for this surge and we still don't even have all of them, but the blogger geniuses think we have 5 times more troops around that we can spare to duplicate this 'succcess' throughout Iraq. And let's not look at American troop casualties from the 'surge', either.
See, we just keep "winning". Of course, in the meantime Mixon is unhappy, with 61 casualties this year so far. And he's been asking for more troops since September, so if we have all of these extra troops around, why has he been waiting? Maybe Mixon is a traitor? Why else would he say things that 'embolden' the enemy? Why does this Major General hate America? Those are the kind of issues the Republicans want the media to explore, while showing lots of flags and eagles, too.
But let's look at the rest of Mixon's statement, rather than focussing on what NBC said:

"The level of violence began to increase before the surge," Mixon said, referring to the Baghdad buildup. "It has increased, of course, during the surge … [because] we are sure that there are elements, both Sunni extremist and Shia extremist, that have moved out of Baghdad."

Okay, so the situation was getting worse before the 'surge', he says. Now it's continuing to get worse. Mixon's casualties have tripled over last year's totals and we're not even halfway through the year yet. That sounds like success to Republicans. In fact, Diyala province is one of the major "success stories" pitched by neocon bloggers, like this one. Mixon also called the local government "non-functional" and the central government "ineffective", which is undoubtedly another mark of 'success" for Republicans. According to the LA Times, "Mixon was withering in his criticism of the Iraqi government, saying it was hamstrung by bureaucracy and compromised by corruption and sectarian discord, making it unable to assist U.S. forces in Diyala." Do those sound like problems that would be solved by more combat troops? Because that's all Bush has up his sleeve: more troops or less troops. Take your pick. This is what we get for $450 billion and counting.
The recent decline of sectarian violence has not come from the increase of U.S. troops, but rather from Al-Sadr making a political gesture to his foreign supporters (e.g. King Abdullah) to try to get a political resolution from the Iraqi Parliament. The Bush Administration, however, is putting al-Maliki on the spot to keep this kind of resolution from occurring, so once Al-Sadr gives up on his political options and turns the "violence faucet" back on, we'll see a flood of sectarian death. And this flood will probably come in the weeks before September when Bush will be making his pitch about "success" in Iraq. And the decline in sectarian death has been about the only bright spot in this "surge'. Bush's ill-considered gamble to force Iraqi politicians into doing his bidding will instead backfire into the collapse of the 'surge'. By then, too, thousands more Iraqis will have been through the torture centres that the Interior Ministry calls "prisons", and they won't come out whistling a happy tune, either.
The sad truth is that the surrounding countries are really trying quite hard to bring about a stabilisation in Iraq, but Bush's short-sighted agenda and penchant for throwing troops at every problem is seriously undermining their efforts. But we can always blame it on the "liberal media" and "surrenderists", can't we?