When I was a platoon leader a few years ago I had these two E-4s who always thought whatever leadership came up with was lame.

One day at a MOUT site at Graf while we were doing an AAR after a platoon attack on the site these two were in the back row, as usual, offering criticisms of the past operation, but not offering any more viable alternatives.

So I told the platoon that we were going to form a new plan and attack again in an hour. Spc X would be the Platoon leader, and Spc Y would be the Platoon Sergeant for the coming attack. Dead silence in the back row.

SFC Bowen and I worked with the two new leaders and helped them as they struggled to formulate a plan. We conducted the attack, had problems, but more importantly the entire platoon realized that it was far easier to follow and criticize than it was to lead.

So, fine, I know I have opinions and I offer them up here knowing that there will be keen eye and minds upon them. It helps me to refine my ideas and make them better.

Help me out. So far your criticisms tend to fall in the category of "that sucks." Ok, fine. Personally, I do think the US has tremendous influence and that negotiations from a US leader is far more than some "lecture."

But I'm open Spc Dayuhan, you're in charge. What is your plan?