In this task, you are given news articles and you need to generate a highlight, i.e., a short summary, with a maximum length of 10 lines.

Q: (CNN) -- Peace. Love. And Snarknado 2. What does it say when Americans unite, not once, but twice in a lifetime for a TV show? And not just a TV show, but one where a twister filled with man-eating sharks menaces a major metropolitan area. We couldn't afford a psychologist so we'll just have to look at social media. Last summer, "Sharknado" churned up a storm of laughs, 5.3 million viewers and enough clever tweets to choke a ... shark. It was the same story Wednesday night for the debut of "Sharknado 2: The Second One" on Syfy. The Twitterverse exploded. #Sharknado2TheSecondOne was the top-trending hashtag on Twitter well into the overnight hours and social search website Topsy recorded more than 215,000 tweets with #sharknado2 over the past day. But what inspires such passion, such creativity? Is it the rubber sharks flying through Midtown Manhattan, the implausible storyline, the Al Roker cameo? Yes. Yes. And yes. With this amount of chum in the water, there was bound to be a feeding frenzy, right? And there's more to come. Syfy has already signed on for a third "Sharknado" movie. Screenwriter Thunder Levin predicts now that New York has gone down, there might be a "global Sharkapocalypse." Heaven forbid. Sequel suggestions are already making the rounds. With all this creativity floating around, some were offering Syfy suggestions for new shows at #NewSyFyOriginals. This one has promise. And you know you've got a good thing going when the National Weather Service and the Weather Channel are joining in on the fun. . Syfy announces 'Sharknado Week' around 'Sharknado 2' premiere . CNN's Dorrine Mendoza contributed to this report.

A: Social media explodes for "Sharknado 2"
It debuted Wednesday on Syfy .
Sharks invade the Big Apple for the sequel to last summer's pop culture phenomenon .
Screenwriter predicts there might be a "global Sharkapocalypse" in third outing .
****
Q: (EW.com) -- To promote her Fox comedy "Raising Hope" (which begins its third season October 2), Martha Plimpton pitched a funny idea. "People are always trying to come up with creative ways of engaging the viewers," she tells EW. "And I thought well, I play a housekeeper on a show, what if I went and cleaned the house of "Raising Hope's" biggest fan. In my uniform." The network thought she was joking, but she was serious. The contest begins today at www.fox.com/cleansweep. Through October 8, fans can enter by submitting their best "Awkward Family Photo" and a paragraph stating why their family is just like the Chance family and why they deserve a house call from Martha and her TV husband Garret Dillahunt. Yes, he's coming along to, to make like his character and mow the winner's lawn. (And okay, they'll have professional crews there to help them.) "Raising Hope" creator Greg Garcia will select the winner from the top 10 finalists in mid-October, and Plimpton and Dillahunt will get their hands dirty later that month or in early November. Entertainment Weekly: What does this say about your commitment to promoting your show? Martha Plimpton: Well, I think it says a lot about my commitment to promoting the show. [Laughs] It's a funny thing: A lot of people who haven't seen the show yet say they haven't watched because they're not really sure what it is. They think it's about a baby, or that it's extremely dumb or something. But I think this show is a lot smarter than people realize. The writing is very, very sharp. If dare I say it, it's a lot more sophisticated underneath. [Laughs] Do you know what I mean? The exterior is really ridiculous and silly, but there's real sophistication in the writing, and I'm really proud to be a part of it. And I think it's really smart, and it makes me laugh. If it makes me laugh, well, I'm sorry, but then it must be good. [Laughs] Because I don't laugh at a lot of things. I'm thrilled that we got a third season. I very much would like for people to enjoy this show as much as I do. I want to share it with the largest amount of people I can. And I will do what is necessary. Muppets: 'Blue Brothers' sing for EW! Clearly. Have you given Greg Garcia any guidelines for choosing the winner? We should stay away from hoarders, crime scenes, and people with too many cats. I'm not bringing a hazmat suit. What's your personal cleaning specialty that fans should be aware of? I am excellent with laundry. For example, as a laundry expert, I never use fabric softener on towels because it makes them less absorbent. I don't know if your readers know this. You should not put Bounce sheets or fabric softener in with your towels. You should dry them separately without fabric softener, so they stay absorbent. And I'm kind of a bed fascist. I don't know if I'll be doing this in the home of our winner, but I like to iron my sheets. I'm that kind of odd person weirdo. See the original article at EW.com. CLICK HERE to Try 2 RISK FREE issues of Entertainment Weekly . © 2011 Entertainment Weekly and Time Inc. All rights reserved.

A: Martha Plimpton will clean a fan's house to promote her Fox comedy "Raising Hope"
Fans can enter to win a house call from Plimpton and Garret Dillahunt through October 8 .
The "Raising Hope" creator will select the winner from the top 10 finalists in mid-October .
****
Q: (CNN) -- The U.S. Army's official history of the Iraq war shows military chiefs made mistake after mistake in the early months of the conflict. Iraqis watch as a statue of Saddam Hussein is toppled in Baghdad in 2003. Failures to recognize the chaos engulfing the country and to send in enough troops to restore order after the 2003 invasion have long been highlighted by critics, but a new report shows the Army assessing itself. Frank opinions from officers serving in the 18 months from the start of war to Iraqi elections in January 2005 reveal there were concerns at the time, not just about assumptions made by planners but at decisions taken once U.S.-led coalition forces had control of Iraq. "I flipped," Gen. Jack Keane, then the Army's deputy chief of staff, told the historians of his reaction to a June 2003 decision to transfer control of all coalition troops away from the land forces command that had been preparing for the mission. He recounted a conversation with Gen. John Abizaid, who succeeded the invasion's architect, Gen. Tommy Franks. "I said, 'Jesus Christ, John, this is a recipe for disaster. We invested in that headquarters. We have the experience and judgment in that headquarters." Keane said it took the U.S. command between six and eight months to get the new headquarters up and running. During that time, troops in the field saw the mood of ordinary Iraqis turn against Americans and watched the insurgency take root. "By the time we got a plan together to resource everything, the insurgents had closed that window of opportunity quickly," Col. David Perkins, a brigade commander in the Army's 3rd Infantry Division, told the historians. "What we started doing in September was probably a good idea to have done in April 2003." Franks, who would soon retire and be awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom, said he ordered the transition to force the Pentagon to get leaders into the field to work with civilian occupation officials. "That is a task that John Abizaid and I very simply laid on Washington and said, 'Figure it out. Do it fast. Get me a joint headquarters in here. We have a lot of work to do and [civilian administrator of Iraq] Jerry Bremer has a lot of responsibility and he needs help,' " he recalled. The 720-page report compiled by the Combat Studies Institute at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, details the effects of having too few coalition troops on the ground when the reality after the fall of Baghdad was "severely out of line" with the anticipated conditions. Previous experience "should have indicated that many more troops would be needed for the post-Saddam era in Iraq," historians wrote in the report, "On Point II: Transition to a New Campaign." "The coalition's inability to prevent looting, to secure Iraq's borders and to guard the vast number of munitions dumps in the early months after Saddam's overthrow are indicative of the shortage," the study found. About 150,000 U.S. and allied troops were in Iraq after the invasion, at a time when war planners were assuming that Iraq's government would remain functional after Hussein's ouster and that there would be no mass insurgency. "These factors were in line with prewar planning for a quick turnover of power to Iraqis and a quick withdrawal of U.S. forces, leaving Iraqis to determine their own political future -- options that proved impossible to execute," the historians wrote in the report released over the weekend. "We had the wrong assumptions, and therefore, we had the wrong plan to put into play," Gen. William Wallace, who commanded the Army's V Corps during the invasion, told the authors. But some of the most critical decisions were made between May and August 2003, which some participants called a "window of opportunity that could have been exploited to produce the conditions for the quick creation of a new Iraq." Among those decisions were the frequently criticized dissolution of the Iraqi army and the order that barred former members of Hussein's Baath Party from public life as well as the change in plan over the joint headquarters.

A:
Army history of Iraq war's first two years says U.S. was unprepared for chaos .
U.S.-led coalition didn't have enough troops after Saddam Hussein's fall, report says .
"This is a recipe for disaster," one general recalls saying of one decision .
****