Wet work is the jargon for killing people--having their blood on your hands. We are allowing the Shiites to hide while our innocent boys and girls commit genocide against the Sunnis.
The McClatchy article "Sweep begins of area ruled by Shiite militia" at http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/world/story/9AB789B0F7C7370886257295000FCEE3?OpenDocument explains that Leila Fadel of McClatchy says "the Sadrists are telling her that the Mahdi Army has strict instructions to lie low and not rock the boat during the security sweep. After all, if the US really could root out the Sunni guerrilla movement, the Shiites would be huge winners."The article "Iraq attacks kill 110 Shiite pilgrims" at click here with all of the killing and concludes
"The Shiites have been used to having swords pointed at their necks," said Fatah Sheik, a journalist and Sadr supporter.
"The more ordeals they see, the more patience they show."
Shiite patience could wither in the face of bombings on the scale of the Samarra attack or the assassination of a major Shiite religious figure. And some U.S. military officials believe there is little they can do to prevent a Sunni bombing campaign.
"Despite all our efforts," said the senior Pentagon official, "we have not gotten to the point we can suppress those car bombs."
The US can’t suppress anything because the surge is failing and the moves by the Sunni and Shiite were predicted as "This is a bit of a chess game," said the senior Pentagon official. "We made a move, we are surging. He [Sadr] made a move, he is laying low. Meanwhile, Al Qaeda is moving."
A military official in Baghdad said U.S. planners predicted both the Shiite militia strategy of curbing death squad executions and a Sunni strategy of attempting ever more spectacular bombings.
"Something that is truly going to attract public attention," said the military official, who also spoke on condition of anonymity. "I don't know what form it will take, but the intent is the media draw."
The article "Cheney's Rules for the Press" at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/blog/2007/02/28/BL2007022801191_pf.html states "Well now it's really truly official: The first benchmark that the White House put forth to the public as evidence that the Iraqis were serious about their own security this time -- and that Bush's latest plan would, unlike the previous ones, actually work -- has been missed….
The White House on Jan. 10 made it clear: "You're going to have some opportunities to judge very quickly. The Iraqis are going to have three brigades within Baghdad within a little more than a month. They have committed to trying to get one brigade in, I think, by the first of February, and two more by the 15th."
But Warren P. Strobel, Jonathan S. Landay and Renee Schoof write for McClatchy Newspapers that "retired Vice Adm. John McConnell, the director of national intelligence, and Army Lt. Gen. Michael Maples, the head of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told the Senate Armed Services Committee [yesterday] that the Iraqi army sent to Baghdad only two of the three additional brigades that were to have been in place by Feb. 15."
Maybe inexperienced bureaucrats can’t articulate their opinions well, but that isn’t the case as even the most seasoned of the GOP faithful have lost their patience with big bro 43! Sen. John Warner, R-Va. said "I do not see evidence, strong evidence, that the Iraqi forces are measuring up in any amount to what the president laid down."
This is pretty simple—no "fuzzy math" can alter the fact that 1/3 of the Iraq troops aren’t showing up! The article "Bush Threatens to Veto Democrats' Iraq Plan" at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/08/AR2007030800206_pf.html explains that the Democratic party wants W to adhere to the benchmarks he recently referred to. It states "Under the House plan, Congress would institute the same tough benchmarks for the Iraqi government that Bush detailed in a national address in January. The president would have to certify by July 1 that the Iraqi government had made progress toward those goals. If he could not, troops would begin withdrawing, with all troops out of combat by year's end. If Bush could certify progress, he would have until Oct. 1 to certify that all of the benchmarks had been met. If they had not, troops would have to be withdrawn by March.
Whatever happened with the benchmarks, troop withdrawals would have to begin by March 1, 2008, under the House bill, and all troops would be out of combat roles by Aug. 31."
