Doubtless, we have to crack down on insurgents in Iraq. Maybe we shouldn’t have gone in so quickly, so recklessly, and with so few friends, but we’re there and we can’t have every Tom, Dick, and Omar just firing at our boys whenever they feel like it. We have to respond. Even a godless East Coast white wine-drinking peacenik like myself understands that.

But we should also remember that the whole “winning the hearts and minds” thing is pretty important here, and that doesn’t mean winning actual hearts, minds, kidneys, and whatnot and putting ‘em on stakes in the town square. It’s a more subtle thing.

With that in mind, maybe we ought to rethink giving Rumsfeld’s military free rein in naming their operations.

Will peace-loving Baghdad residents get a warm and fuzzy feeling towards a bunch of warplanes taking out buildings in the name of “Operation Iron Hammer?” Does the idea of unleashing “Operation Ivy Cyclone” upon Iraq inspire confidence in our ultimately benevolent intentions? And will the hearts and minds of Iraq really believe that we intend to give them their nation back when the 82nd Airborne is flying “Task Force All American” over their heads?

I’m not suggesting that we force our fighting men to suffer through missions called “Operation Fluffy Kitten” or “Task Force Big Hug.” No, that would be embarrassing. But some sort of compromise between wimpy nomenclatures and terrifying blood-n-guts names would probably be a good thing. Maybe something like “Operation Get the Bad Guys While Keeping Our Iraqi Friends Safe.” But shorter and catchier, of course. That would help.

But it doesn’t seem like anyone’s really paying attention to the Quake-playin’ military wonks who name these things. Therefore, you can expect next week to see the launch of “Task Force Meat Grinder” and “Operation MegaKill.” So it looks like we’ll have to get to those hearts and minds the old-fashioned way. With shrapnel.