This may be war's worst month in 2 years for U.S.

At least 11 U.S. troops were killed in Iraq in a 30-hour period ending Wednesday, putting October on track to be the deadliest month for Americans since Marines stormed insurgent-controlled Fallujah almost two years ago.

Noting a growing number of deaths by small-arms fire, analysts say U.S. troops increasingly are caught in the middle between Sunni and Shiite extremists in what has become a religious civil war.

"The killing is not incidental anymore," said retired Army Maj. Gen. Robert Scales, former commandant of the U.S. Army War College. "Suicide bombs are still a threat, but we are seeing an increase in close combat, meaning Americans are being caught in the crossfire, quite literally."

U.S. officials attributed the increased casualties to an expected rise in attacks during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, which ends next week, as well as to recently changed tactics by U.S. troops, who are flooding Baghdad neighborhoods in a security crackdown. The bulk of the latest deaths occurred in the capital, where seven service members died from small-arms attacks and roadside bombs.

Ten deaths Tuesday, along with that of an American soldier in Baghdad by small-arms fire Wednesday, brought the number of U.S. troop fatalities for October to 70 — already the third-highest monthly total in 2006. If the pace continues, the monthly death toll will be 121.

One hundred twenty-five U.S. troops were killed in action in November 2004, and 126 were killed in action in April 2004, during offensives in Fallujah and Najaf.

The spike in U.S. deaths, along with a growing number of badly wounded troops, seemed likely to intensify pressure on the Bush administration for a major change in strategy in Iraq. Change has been demanded by partisan critics and recently suggested by such Republican stalwarts as Sen. John Warner of Virginia, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, and former Secretary of State James Baker, co-chairman of a panel expected to propose a significant shift in strategy after the midterm elections.

"What about all these predictions we've heard about how Iraq is getting better, that we've turned the corner, that the violence is going down? Clearly this casualty rate means the U.S. approach is not working," said Lawrence Korb, a national-security analyst at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank in Washington, D.C. Korb, a senior Pentagon official during the Reagan administration, is a frequent critic of Bush administration defense policies.

White House spokesman Tony Snow, asked whether the sharp increase in deaths would cause President Bush to rethink his strategy, replied: "No. The strategy is to win."

In an interview with ABC News, Bush acknowledged the surge in violence could be the Iraqi equivalent of the 1968 Tet offensive, which helped turn U.S. popular opinion against the Vietnam War and undermined support for President Johnson.

Asked whether he agreed with a columnist who said the Iraq fighting mirrored Tet, Bush said that "could be right."

"There's certainly a stepped-up level of violence, and we're heading into an election," he said.

Since March 2003, when the war began, 2,785 Americans have died in Iraq, according to an Associated Press count. An additional 20,687 military personnel have been wounded, according to the Pentagon.

More than half of the past week's dead were killed outside the capital, mostly in Anbar and Diyala provinces, where sectarian violence has been fierce. The Pentagon does not make available similar details on wounded personnel.

What has caught the eye of military officers and analysts is the causes of the deaths.

This month alone, 30 Americans were killed by small-arms fire and 34 by homemade bombs, according to Pentagon data, a change from previous trends in which the vast majority of casualties were caused by what the military calls improvised explosive devices, or IEDs. Army officers say they have cut in half the casualty rate from IEDs since 2004 with improved detection and jamming techniques. But the increase in casualties from small-arms fire has more than made up the difference.

"It used to be just IEDs, but what we are seeing now is they shoot at our guys and then scatter and try to draw us into an ambush, and then detonate an IED," said a Pentagon officer granted anonymity because he is not authorized to discuss operations.

These tactics suggest a subtle but important change in the conflict, said Robert Killebrew, a retired senior Army strategist and Pentagon consultant.

"What was terrorism and random acts of violence is coalescing into an almost classic religious civil war," he said. "It is the actions of the Iraqi government now that will make or break the situation."

Background on previous death tolls was provided by The Washington Post.