Bush said today that the part we need to work on is the “holding”–and that is the new strategy..improving the “holding”.

That is not a new strategy, that is just trying to make the same old strategy work by trying harder.

A new strategy would mean trying something other than “Clear, Hold, and Build”

Maybe something like I’ve described above would be an example of a NEW strategy….although I will be the first to admit my strategy certainly has holes in it. And since I’m not in charge of a new military strategy, I don’t have to fill in the holes in my strategy.

I just think there are better ways of handling (and improving) the situation we find ourselves in the middle east than almost anything the President has tried (that I know of).

I’m back with the positive ideas you requested. I’ve said these things in a previous post and no one commented. I really don’t know enough about effective war tactics to say that my ideas are perfect…but I think a sincere listener knows what I’m saying (especially compared to the current strategy).

I just know that Sun Tzu said that the biggest key to victory in any war is the use of spies.

I hate any and all wars, but if I were a war mongerer, and truly believed the Iranians are going to kill us all if we don’t stop them..I would do the following:

1) Remove the US military from the population centers (cities and towns) of Iraq to military bases in sparsely populated areas and on the borders. This will allow us to maintain a serious military presence and be ready to guard against interference from Iran, Syria or any one else in the ME who may try to mess with the situation.

AND it removes the bulk of the members of the military OUT of the middle of a civil war but still in a position where they can help if help is needed (in Iraq or anywhere in ME). This will reduce the number of deaths and/or casualties significantly.

2) Use the CIA, the NSA, the FBI, and the elite special forces to conduct the brunt of the war–in an undercover/stealth fashion. If the special forces/CIA/FBI/ Special Forces is not equipped to handle fighting the brunt of the war–then we need to change that quickly.

They should receive the full support of the Air Force, Navy, and Army for anything they need at any time. But do everything possible to limit the combat missions–along with intelligence gathering to members of special forces/CIA/FBI, etc.

No more US military members driving around or standing around (in uniform) in the cities to be used as target practice for insurgents and/or terrorists.

Also, I know special forces are a part of the Army, Navy, and Air Force. I am just saying that ONLY special forces –with help from and along side of the CIA, FBI, NSA, ETC should be used to conduct combat missions.

To win this war (especially the propaganda war), we need to keep a low-profile in the middle-east.

3) Talk to the enemy (Iran). Face to Face. Show the world we are the ones playing fairly and not being deaf to what everyone else is saying.

4) At the same time, send in special forces, CIA, FBI, to Iran, if necessary–and start making sure they will never develop nuclear weapons that threaten everyone (especially Israel). Publicly deny any and all claims by Iran, Syria or anyone else that we are conducting secret military operations. Keep the war small by pretending like there is no war going on.

Maybe all of this stuff would already be happening if Halliburton wasn’t making $30 per meal–per soldier–3 meals per day.

When was the last time you went out for a meal that cost $30 (all by yourself–no alcoholic drinks)?

Who’s making sacrifices for this war?

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2007/02/dr_gillian_mckeith_barred_from_calling_self_doctor/

There’s something to the thing that people get fooled for a reason. People who look at Iran and what not, and think that the invasion of Iraq empowered the Iranians/Shia is thinking that you can split the ME into factions called Sunni vs Shia. But that isn’t true, that isn’t how the faction/clans in the ME play out.

I concur with that guy’s view on Iran.

That wasn’t exactly what I had in mind. You managed to answer my plea for positive ideas with a several hundred word rant against Bush and not . . . one . . . single . . . positive idea. Now that you’ve gotten the rant out of your system, how about some positive ideas on what we should be doing (and, perhaps, a little bit on why you think your plan of action would work)? Thanks, DQ

By embracing the threat! (DQ) Take Diane Sawyer on 12Feb. Iranian Di(e) anointed the new imam today on Arab Broadcasting (abc). Ms. Sawyer, whose ties to Iran are now explicit, was charming with the genocidal maniac, as befits one who sees Iran as saving the world.
SAVING THE WORLD!?– is this poor excuse for a civilized journalist simply insane?
Or does Iranian Di(e) not mind the hideous lies from this blood-soaked monster? (I stopped the interview after this opening paragraph. No real journalist serves as a conduit for totalitarian propaganda.) The American press serves as mouthpieces for Islamic guilt and terror.

“We shy away from any kind of conflict and any kind of bloodshed, and we will be sad by such. We are opposed to any kind of conflict and as we have said repeatedly we think the world problem can be solved through dialogue, the use of logic and a sense of friendship. There is no need for the use of force.”