Each and every day, when I scan the news for events in Iraq, I constantly see headlines screaming things like; "US Forces say kill 34 militants"," "38 militants killed in fierce fighting in Baghdad," and, "US Military: 28 Militants Killed in Fresh Clashes in Baghdad." That's just some headlines from the past 24 hours. What really pisses me off is the fact that the Pentagon always portrays the slain as 'Militants' or even outlaws on occasion, granted, I'm sure some of those casualties were the 'bad guys', but, all 28, 34, or, even 38 were the enemy...? Honestly, how do we truly know?

Which brings me to a point I'd like to make, in that, while we're engaging the enemy in MOUT operations in the slums of Sadr City, how many innocents are caught in the crossfire? Is this counter insurgency fight really achieving the intended result? Has it produced any tangible results? I'd say we're actually losing ground, rather than gaining ground! For every militant we slay, two more are made with the loss of a family member caught in the crossfire!

Let's be clear about one constant refrain I hear about the bad guys cowardly hiding behind the skirts of innocents... For instance; "Why are they putting their families and friends and neighbors in danger," he asked me. "Why are they shooting from rooftops of civilian buildings?" Okay, how about the fact it's their home they're defending and we're the aggressor along with Maliki's Badr Brigades infested Iraqi Army... Do you expect them to mass in one designated area and be mown down by Artillery strikes or Hellfire missiles alongside Apaches...? Let's get real here, folks!

Let's take a look at what we're doing:

“The U.S. shelling in sectors 10 and 11 in Sadr City from 11:00 am until 6:00 pm on Tuesday left 24 dead and 60 wounded, most of them women and children,” the source, who asked for anonymity, told Aswat al-Iraq – Voices of Iraq – (VOI). Sadr City, a stronghold of Sadr's Mahdi Army militias, has been witnessing armed clashes since Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki announced last month the commencement of a security operation codenamed Saulat al-Forsan (Knights' Assault) in the port city of Basra, Iraq's second largest province and an oil-hub, 590 km south of Baghdad, which he said targeted "outlaws."

Here's an up close snap shot:

In this photo 2 year old Ali Hussein is seen being pulled from the rubble of his family’s home in Sadr City Tuesday, April 29, 2008.

Ali’s home was one of four destroyed by U.S. missiles.

Ali died in hospital a few hours later.

Now, let's look at what many Iraqis are now demanding...

Cross-party group called for a human-rights investigation into the Sadr City attacks
There has been unusually blatant mis-representation of the parliamentary sit-in in Sadr City yesterday in the corporate media and elsewhere, the gist of the media strategy being to leave out three key points.

(1) The group included members of every major parliamentary political party except for the Supreme Council, and the Dawa Party, which are the main Shiite parties supporting the Maliki administration.

(2) The delegation, in its final statement, called not only for an end to the military operations against Sadr City, and a lifting of the blockade. It also called for an investigation into the human-rights violations that Sadr City residents have been subjected to.

(3) The delegation said the government should coordinate with the Sadrist organization in any arrest operations it wants to carry out in Sadr City, rather than attacking them.

Interesting, everybody but, Maliki and Betrayus wants us to lift the siege... Very interesting... They want al-Sadr to have his 60,000 strong militia to lay down their arms before they will allow the Sadrists to participate in the political process, how far will that go...? Here's a good synopsis...

Al Sadr has, over the past year, been taught several lessons:

* Unilaterally declaring a ceasefire does not protect you from being attacked;
* Participating in the political process does not protect you from being attacked;
* Allowing Tehran to broker a ceasefire in Basra does not protect you from being attacked in Baghdad;
* If you have a political perspective (unified state, rapid U.S. troop withdrawal) that puts you at odds with other power centers, you are at risk.

Would you disarm...? Sounds like a rock and a hard spot... Gawd, I hate this war and this Maladministration...!