You've probably read how John McCain explained yesterday that he wasn't wrong about the timing in Iraq, because
"First of all, a surge is really a counterinsurgency strategy," Mr. McCain said in Bethlehem, Pa. "And it’s made up of a number of components. And this counterinsurgency was initiated to some degree by Colonel MacFarland in Anbar Province, relatively on his own. And I visited with him in December of 2006. He had already initiated that strategy in Ramadi by going in, and clearing and holding in certain places. That is a counterinsurgency. And he told me at that time that he believed that that strategy, which is quote ‘the surge,’ part of the surge, would be, would be, successful."
Implied, of course, is that the Surge would have been the Surge even if it had involved no increase (what the uninformed would call a 'surge') in troops.
Unfortunately, many people have been unable to grasp the subtlety of McCain's argument. Therefore, allow me to expand on John McCain's point of view ...
A Surge is all good things to all good people. It is the source of all health, wealth, and happiness.
A Surge is Raindrops on roses and whiskers on kittens.
The Shoemaker's elves were a Surge.
Whenever things work out for you, it can be called a Surge.
Where do we get a Surge? Let's paraphrase Tom Joad
The Surge'll be all aroun' in the dark.
The Surge'll be ever'where--wherever you look.
Wherever there's a fight so hungry people can eat, the Surge'll be there.
Wherever there's a cop beatin' up a guy, the Surge'll be there.
The Surge'll be in the way guys yell when they're mad
--an' the Surge'll be in the way kids laugh when they're hungry an' they know supper's ready.
An' when our people eat the stuff they raise, an' live in the houses they build, why, the Surge'll be there too.
I hope that clears things up for you and that you are duly ashamed of yourselves for opposing the Surge.
Bonus:
A little nostalgia