From: Adam <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the field.near
the bridge">


> Here's the key line from the excerpt I posted:
>
> But the Joint Chiefs think the White House, after a month of talks,
> still does not have a defined mission and is latching on to the surge
> idea in part because of limited alternatives,

Oh indeed. B*gger all strategic let alone tactical planning.

1) US PBI can clear a town.

2) Iraqi insurgents are mobile

3) So you need to quietly encircle a town & direct all leaving through
a screening system (possibly including an explosives detector esp wrt
hands) .

4) Then you "shorten your lines" till you all meet in the central
square of the city while still doing (3).

(5) Here's the tricky part.....you then move onto the next city/town etc
(hopefully keeping the element of suprise (i.e. no one bad leaves while
you're encircling)) while........leaving local troops who are capable of
keeping a cleansed city cleansed e.g. keep the "city gates" in
operation
& keep people around who are watching the guards (e.g. for signs of
corruption/cooperation with the adoo).

but.....simply spreading 30-40K troops out in packets around the country
will do b*gger all except drain the US treasury.

I should point out that the above has been std since at least Caesar's
Gallic Campaign.

But given the vogue for the "new" in warfighting, Roman
pacification tactics are probably not on the mil curriculum.

Also.....you're not allowed to line the roads with the crucified....


Adam

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5