Replies

Therefore, Zarqawi practically knows our every move before we make it. It's dumb, dumb, dumb, imo.

Not the case at all -

Zarqawi is simply working within a structure which moves within our OODA loop - He has no "inside word" regarding our tactical moves or Ops - He simply is operating within a time frame that is quicker then our current OODA loop allows for -

Additionally, those specific units we have working the Zarqawi hunt do not use any of the Iraqi assets and personnel you mentioned (Iraqi police units, Green zone personal, etc).

Furthermore working with the Iraqi people is a must. It is essential to our goals in Iraq. Trying to compare the current GWOT with that of WWII is faulty for too many reasons then I have time currently to list (and remember we lost well over 400,000 KIA men in WWII).

Many ex-generals or even ex-war pundits make the mistake of "always trying to fight / win the last war", "not the current one". The situations between the current GWOT (which not only includes Iraq, but in which Iraq is essential to) and wars of the past, there are very few workable parallels.

Hi, DevSix! Thanks for the feedback. It's nice to hear from you again.
I suppose I'm less worried about the enemy getting the "inside word" than I am about him planting spies everywhere in amongst our troops, and collecting tons of analyzable data on them. Such information can tell Zarqawi a whole lot about what we're up to in our day-to-day ops, even if he were unable to plant someone in a sensitive position (which I'd wager he has been able to do).

... and remember we lost well over 400,000 KIA men in WWII

How many millions of men did Hitler have in arms? Thankfully, Zarqawi has nowhere near that number. And I think I can safely guarantee that we would've have suffered vastly more KIAs in WWII if Nazi spies had been tucking our troops in every night! </tongue-in-cheek metaphors> :-)
Making an observation like the one I'm making isn't a matter of fighting the last war. Rather, it's a lesson I think we can take from all wars where "it" (i.e., being what I think is a little too cavalier in our approach to enemy intelligence gathering capabilities) has been done.