The Skinny: More Grim News From Iraq

Attacks On U.S. Forces, Iraqis Hit Record Level; Insurgents Pull The Plug On Baghad

(CBS)  The Skinny is Hillary Profita's take on the top news of the day and the best of the Internet.

---

A Pentagon quarterly report released as Robert Gates began his tenure as the new defense secretary revealed that this fall marked a record period of insurgent violence, with "an average of almost 960 attacks against Americans and Iraqis every week, the highest level recorded since the Pentagon began issuing the quarterly reports in 2005," writes the New York Times.

"The violence has escalated at an unbelievably rapid pace," said Marine Lt. Gen. John F. Sattler, director of strategic plans and policy for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

The Los Angeles Times and the Washington Post highlight the report on their front pages as does the Wall Street Journal's newsbox.

"Also stated for the first time," the report said that Moktada al-Sadr's Shiite militia "has replaced al-Qaeda as 'the most dangerous' force propelling Iraq toward civil war, as Shiite militants kill more civilians than do terrorists," writes the Post.

Identifying the situation in Iraq as a "civil war" is still apparently touchy territory, but this report "unlike the prior one, "omitted any explicit statement that Iraq is not in a civil war," writes the Post. But, the LA Times writes, "the report stops short of calling the sectarian conflict a civil war."

Instead, the report took this route in parsing the phrase: "The situation in Iraq is far more complex than the term 'civil war' implies," said the report, the Post explains. "Conditions that could lead to civil war do exist," it said, but added that the Iraqi government, backed by the U.S.-led coalition, "could mitigate further movement toward civil war and curb sectarian violence."

The NY Times writes that "indications of progress" in the report "were few." While the report said the Iraqi government was taking "incremental" steps at increasing its responsibility and leadership among security forces, "it remained 'urgent' for the Iraqi government 'to demonstrate a resolve to contain and terminate sectarian attacks.'"

More U.S. Troops To Iraq?

The debate over whether to send a surge of troops into Iraq for a temporary period of several months is raging not only on the Sunday morning talking heads shows, but within the White House. "US officials familiar with the intense debate" tell the Washington Post that the White House is "aggressively promoting the concept over the unanimous disagreement of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."

According to the Post's sources, the Joint Chiefs "think the White House, after a month of talks, still does not have a defined mission and is latching on to the surge idea in part because of limited alternatives, despite warnings about the potential disadvantages for the military..."

An anonymous "senior administration official" told the paper that it is "'too simplistic' to say the surge question has broken down into a fight between the White House and the Pentagon, but the official acknowledged that the military has questioned the option."

Sunny Iraq Still Doesn't Have Much Electricity

The NY Times front page also brings news of the veritable "electrical siege" on Baghdad, "reflected in constant power failures and disastrously poor service in the capital..." The towers that support power lines are frequently the object of explosives and the crews that attempt to repair them are "often attacked and sometimes killed."

It's estimated by the State Department that there is an average of about 7 hours of electricity a day in Baghdad and about 9 hours nationwide. "Many Iraqis contend" that those figures "lean toward the optimistic side."

According to the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction, before the war, Baghdad had 16 to 24 hours of power and the rest of Iraq 4 to 8 hours. The Iraqi electricity minister has a plan for repair that would cost $27 billion over 10 years.

The Post writes that "some electricity experts knowledgeable about the plan say that even under optimistic assumptions, those enormous expenditures would not bring electrical supplies in line with demand before 2009." "I don't know how the people in Iraq are going to accept that reality," one Iraqi electrical engineer told the Post. "That after five years, six years, they are still suffering from a lack of electricity ."

Anti-Aging Products Much Like Magical Beans. Really Expensive Ones.

Ok, really, ladies. We must stop buying beauty products called "biodynamic lifting cream" for $300 an ounce. Seriously. Despite the fact that "the efficacy of these products is difficult, if not impossible, to measure," the anti-aging product market is raking in about $2 billion a year writes the Wall Street Journal today. That's $2 billion for products that essentially claim to defy the laws of physics via facial cream.

"For many of these ingredients, nobody's ever done independent clinical trials to see whether these things are effective," Daniel Behroozan, clinical instructor of dermatology at UCLA, told the Journal. And yet, business is booming – sales of anti-aging products have increased by 42 percent in the last three years.

And you know what that means! "Suppliers are getting more aggressive about pushing prices higher and higher," says the paper. Like a "1-ounce skin serum containing gold particles" that goes for $525. Or a $350 bottle of serum "containing extracts from cured Sauvignon grapevines."

Don't even really get what that means. Isn't curing something that's done to ham? And what does that have to do with stemming the aging process? Does this sound like an "X-Files" storyline?

[nadeau4201]

EVERYONE PLEASE LOOK UP
www.newswithviews.com/Craig/roberts/10.htm
This is were America is headed.

[speedyclick]

It's "vale" of tears, not "veil" of tears.

"Too simplistic" is also wrong. "Too simple" or "simplistic" will do, but "simplistic" MEANS something that is overly simple.

You'd think a national news service and the people it quotes could at least get their grammar and spelling right.

I agree mostrem56.... Hillary Profita's only job is to copy and paste articles from other news sources, she then can't even do a spell/thesaurus check for errors. She needs to get a job delivering newspapers not web publishing

[pendragon679]

Uh, hate to disappoint you, mostrem, but my American Heritage dictionary defines a vale as "a valley, often coursed by a stream." A veilis defined as "something that conceals, separates, or screens like a curtain: a veil of secrecy." I'd say that makes the expression "veil of tears correct." Having said that, I kind of wonder how the Washington Post defines a terrorist vs. a Shiite militant. . .

[Syndicate]

Wheres the good news? Where's the story about the booming economy?

[sty1]

Saddam was doing a good job, I have always said. Turns out, he was doing a very good job. And our Dumbo leader will have to answer for war crimes...SORRY Sadam. Hang in thare buddy.

[duffyshort]

Bush should have immediately tripled the size of the armed services after the 9-11-01 attacks. But that would have forced him to postpone Mr. Cheney's bogus war-time tax cuts and roll back his 2000 tax cuts. Given a choice between national security and curry favor with his wealthy buddies with zillion-dollar tax cuts, he chose the tax cuts to screw us.

[hmorrisonp]

I have never seen a President like Bush that can so easily disengage himself from reality. Maybe it is those inner voices that spoke to him in that school classroom the day of 9-11%u2014"tell me it's not so!"

Oh he'll hang alright terryates

[pendragon679]

So now King Dubya decides we need to increase the size of the military. Where are these extra troops going to come from? Here's an idea: start by signing up your useless bimbo daughters, Dubya. Then, Mr. VP, sign up your children, along with any nieces, nephews, cousins and in-laws you might have. Hell, give Rummy an M-16 and some body armor (not too much, though) and parachute him into Sadr City. . .

[rihan156]

I would ask all those who advocate for a troops buildup in Iraq to tell us what these troops are supposed to do: serve as target between factions when they fight, police the streets of a city in a country they don't know or understand wheareas they are not welcome, or sit in their barracks in the green zone because The decider does not want to leave Iraq? I suggest these "rat leaders" all relocate in Iraq "until the job is done."

I understand that all these people are building networks outside the country for when they leave power in 2008 so that they have business partners for a lucrative future. But what about the overworked young men and women sent to death without the proper equipement, the Iraqis civilians killed at random or because of missed targets? This is pure machiavellism, cynicism and political incompetence. How could you add another floor atop of a building sitting on shaky foundations?

Politics entails the ability to negotiate during conflicts to get to a compromise with those who dissent. Refusing to talk to those who think otherwise is dictature, and imposing one's rule to other countries without their choice is imperialism. Next time Americans choose a leader, make sure he/she has successfully run a company, business, or organization, has integrity and is competent for the job.

[seenitall-2009]

Before G.B. leaves he will have us in another conflict with iran or whoever doesnt bow to him. To even think of sending more troops after the elections shows the utter disregard for the people's voice ,which pretty much makes our democracy a joke .He is the king and to hell with the peasents.

[judykins2002]

When I read the comment sections of online news I find a majority of comments are extreme leftist views. Why is it that liberals are so outspoken?...Because they want to force others to think like them, as irrational as much of their thought processes are.

You know what this country needs? We do need to pull troops out of Iraq, just like the liberals want, and then when our country is attacked again they will be hollering, "Why didn't somebody do something?", "I just don't understand...but we were NICE to them!"

LOL, Do you not have a clue yet people? When you are affected by the unevolved, uncivilized behavior of the beasts, I'll be laughing at you.

[four1475]

It seems everyone has a very strong opinion on Iraq. Although I understand the passion (there is much at stake over this complex and divisive conflict), I often wonder how informed these opinions are. I don't expect to receive accurate medical advice from my mechanic, but everyone seems to have expert advice on what we should do in Iraq. How about this...you spend a year over here in Baghdad or out in Ramadi, and then you will have earned the right to an opinion. If staying in Iraq is so damned critical for our national security, how about YOU pick up a weapon and patrol the streets for a while, spending every other year away from your family, making a personal and tangible sacrifice for what you deem so important. Spend a night pulling the broken and bloody bodies of your brothers out of a HMMWV or picking up the pieces of what's left of them after a rocket attack, and then see how you feel. Is the cost worth the results? Why don't you come find out for yourself.

[romero5957]

Is anyone else thinking that Iraq was much safer and much freer under Saddam Hussein's governance? Certainly the US isn't made safer by inciting violence abroad. How could we make such a mess in such a short period of time?