It's not your imagination. Iraq violence has gotten worse.

The last three month period was the deadliest in post Saddam Iraq for US troops, Iraqi security forces, and Iraqi civilians according to a required quarterly report to Congress.

The Air Force General presenting the report pointed out that this period includes the bombing of the Askariyah shrine in Samarra. Indeed, that did lead to a significant rise in the number of deaths, but his logic, that this is merely a spike and these numbers require "perspective," assumes that other similar provacative acts will not occur in the future, that that bombing was not just a further stage in the violence.

From the AP story on this report, "the Iraqi insurgency seems likely to hold its strength the rest of the year," and it "offered a relatively dim picture of economic progress, with few gains in improving basic services like electricity, and it provided no promises of U.S. troop reductions anytime soon."

Also, as you read articles on the appointment of Iraqi Interior and Defense Ministers, keep your eyes open for some version of this line. (It's in almost every story on the vacant ministries.)

The Interior Ministry, which controls the police forces, has been promised to the Shiites. Sunni Arabs are to get the defense ministry, overseeing the army. It is hoped the balance will enable al-Maliki to move ahead with a plan for Iraqis to take over all security duties over the next 18 months so U.S.-led troops can begin withdrawing.

I understand the logic of a Shia Police force and a Sunni Army acting as balance, but also, you're talking about giving government backed armed forces to each side. The mechanism by which "balance" is achieved may not be as pleasant as this description sounds.

Last, Two more Iraq stories, one on the plight of a family of "the displaced," (I hate that euphemism) and a second on the plight of the burgeoning number of widows in Iraq.