No Assymetry Here

This is a response I received from reader Lurch of MainandCentral to one of my recent postings. It was so erudite (and he talks good, too), that I figured I'd share it. I was trying to come to those words, but he said it in a more effective manner:

I appreciate the additional information. If I wasn't clear enough, you and I are in almost complete agreement regarding Iraq, and all its subsidiary threads of discussion. As you stated, LTG Petraeus has a "leg" mentality and is in fact to command grunts rather than Special Operations teams, even if they might nominally fall under his command. And yes, the troops will take the maximum response option when attacked. It would be idiocy to do otherwise.

I never saw Hue, thank heavens. A few years after separation I worked in an office with a guy who had been a US Army MP up there during Tet. He had no funny war stories to tell about the experience. From what I've read and heard, urban combat has to be the most brutal and casualty-rich of the land environments.

I see no benefit for a Spec Ops background in such an environment. It's pure attritional warfare, with little opportunity for asymmetric applications, as far as I can see. True, maybe this is one of those "you had to have been there" types of things where only those who know the password and grip understand.

As you observed, Mr Bu$h doesn't want a scalpel; he's tasking LTG Petraeus with using a sledgehammer.

Now, using SF troops in their original purpose of training indigenous personnel is exactly what's needed, but Field Marshals Kristol and Kagan have already decided that option is not useful.

Am I missing something or is LTG Petraeus's skillset immaterial, since we're apparently going to use Mongolian tactics anyway?