But imagine for a moment you were the national security adviser of Barack Obama asking yourself what the Anaconda chart implied about the global strategy against terrorism. We find that "engagement" or diplomacy has a place in Petraeus' strategy. (It is in the 12 o'clock position of the chart). So far so good. But what to do about "information operations", "kinetics", "intelligence" and "religious engagement"? In other words, where does one fit in activities like spying on the enemy, misleading them, debating them, killing them, building indigenous forces against them and criticizing -- where necessary -- their religion? How feasible is it to do this from Kuwait -- where all forces are to be withdrawn at the rate of one or two brigades per month? And how popular will such activities be with the Democratic base?
Part of the implicit promise of Change is that that We Can Find a Better Way. Well maybe we can. And they're going to bet the farm on it.