Stratfor's Approach to OIF phase 5,6,7?

[Jedburgh]

...The tactics they propose:

• Withdraw U.S. forces to containment positions:
• Bulk in southern Iraq, in Shiite territory (watching them, esp for Iran influence) and buffering Shiite / Iran influence from Saudi Arabia.
• Smaller force w/ Kurds (they have more organic capability, and aren't main effort)
• Let the Sunnis have Al Anbar. Influence through diplomacy and local partners, esp. Saudia Arabia. Dicey, but less so than some of the other diplomatic miracles we're counting on.
• Let the Iraqis solve their own problems, in a contained, mitigated environment. Maybe still ugly, but lightest shade of gray feasible.

They suggest we should not maintain our myriad strongpoints anywhere but in the relative safety of our buffer zones, but note there will be political pressure to do so far more than makes sense. Compromise suggested is BIAP only.

So...at first it pissed me off as defeatist. But the more I mull it over, the more I like it. What do you think?

It is not just defeatist; it is a set-up for a melt-down. It gives Iran more credit than it is due, and thus recommends devoting more resources than necessary to that aspect of the situation. And by essentially abandoning Al-Anbar to the bad guys it negates any real possibility of the "Iraqis solving their own problems". What about the cross-border infil of bad guys and operations of clandestine support networks from Syria, Jordan & Saudi Arabia? And I'm not talking just foreign fighters - Syria, especially, has a large Iraqi Sunni Arab expat population that it is doing little to monitor and control. Funny, given the general nature of the Syrian police-state...

I suggest taking a read of Looking Beyond a Surge: The Tests a New US Strategy in Iraq Must Meet, by Cordesman at CSIS. Although not as "prescriptive" as StratFor attempts to be, it is far more insightful in its analysis.