The surge has merely provided evidence that it is "boots-on-the-ground" that win a war, not necessarily superior precision bombing or big shiny tanks. Have a patrol every two blocks, and it gets pretty hard to snipe at someone without having people swarm all over you. Want to win COIN wars? Stop buying the military version of Lexus SUVs and ipods, strip down some of the bureaucracy (32 non-combatants to a soldier? please.), and build a bigger army. Ever watch those youtubes of the army in Afghanistan? It's like watching fat cub-scouts out "camping" in an RV: they stick close to their vehicles, and hardly ever venture out into the wild. Get those men out of their tanks and have them walk about and "take the fight to the enemy."

Problem is, people would then wine about how you're "not doing enough to protect soldiers" by getting them out of their tanks and up-armored hummers.

Your approach might work better, but more people might get killed without all that armor.

Then the media will do a sob story about how PVT so-and-so died because his mean commander had him get out of his tank, like you suggested.

Excuse the military for trying to preserve human life. Do you even know how many Soldiers we've lost in previous wars. You say the army looks like "fat cub-scouts out "camping" in an RV" why don't you get out from behind your computer and try walking around in 130 degree temps with a 75lbs kit. This isn't a jungle or trench war, where we just aimlessly continue to throw Soldiers into the grinder. We're trying to bring home as many as we can walking and talking, not in boxes. If you think Soldiers have enough protection and need to expose themselves to more fire, then go on down to your local recruiter and sign-up. Come on over and see if you even have the nerve to cross the wire.

His analogy of soldiers as "fat cub scouts" was not the best and potentially insulting, to say the least, but it brings up one point in regards to unconventional warfare.

If you focus *too* much of safety, if you load your soldiers down with *too* much equipment and body armor, they're safe, but almost immobalized in certain circumstances and less lethal.

A "G" just takes a few pot shots and runs, knowing that he will not be caught on foot because even an olympian could only manage a shuffle with all the garbage soldiers have to wear and carry.

You most efective anti-G forces have been unconventional and light, wearing only what they needed and moving in the shadows, out "Ging" the "G".

There's nothing "light" about our light infantry, where they're loaded down with crap and patrol out in the open.