Pentagon: Conditions for Civil War Exist.

The Congressionally mandated quarterly report on Iraq came out today(Thanks, Dems.)

An interesting point in an early CNN report, the Pentagon correspondent was talking about what a definitional shift to civil war would actually mean because the tactics for a civil war are sharply different than the tactics currently employed.

The US is currently attempting a "clear and hold" counter- insurgency campaign whereas in a civil war, the tactics would be political reconciliation and policing the truce. You can't do "clear and hold" in a civil war because it would force taking a side.

A "civil war" strategy would be a radical shift from the current approach.

(I might argue that both an insurgency and civil are going on at the same time. What are the tactics for that?)

UPDATE: The NYTimes article is a little longer, and a little grimmer, but you gotta like the kicker they stuck at the end.

The Pentagon distributed the report on a Friday afternoon before a long weekend, a common time for government officials to put out bad news.

Or maybe the CNN headline: Pentagon: Cold-blooded carnage soaring in Iraq.

The AP now has a good longer version, too.

And here's a .pdf of the report from the NYTimes.