Taking a page from Rep. John Murtha (D-Cut’n'Run), I’ve decided to start pushing for a complete re-thinking of U.S. Defense policy. Murtha, a combat vet (who therefore has double secret moral authority on defense matters, whose word must be taken as gospel and is above criticism) has some new ideas about how U.S. troops should be deployed to protect allies and the oil supply in the middle east. In short, he recommends that U.S. troops now serving in the Middle East be relocated to Okinawa, to form a quick reaction force to protect ye olde oil supply, or to help our Iraqi allies if necessary.

Since the idea is beyond criticism due to various intellectual principles (“Get your hands off our Murtha, fat assed Chikkenhock!”) it must be taken quite seriously. And, since military principles are universal in nature, we need to figure out how we can apply Murtha’s radical new approach to force projection to other defense activities.

Okinawa is roughly 5,500 miles from Baghdad. If we can station troops at similar distances from their missions, and save money and perhaps lives doing so, we should look into it.

The troops now in Germany as part of NATO forces, could be relocated from Heidelberg, to Rio de Janeiro. That’s a switch of about 5,000 miles. The cost of living would be a bit lower, the troops would appreciate the hot chicks (wimmen troops would appreciate living in a country with guys willing to dance, I’m sure), and the troops could avoid the dangers of potent German beer, and driving on the autobahn.

The troops now in Korea, keeping the lunatic Kim Jong Il at bay, could be relocated to Nairobi. That’s about 6,000 miles, which is a bit of a stretch, but given up-armored Hummers, it should be no problem to just pop the quick reacting Second Infantry Division on up to the D.M.Z. if the North Korean maniac tries to attack. The advantage of Nairobi is that while much of Africa is plagued by disease and civil war, the locals would probably welcome the economic boost that would come from having 50,000 troops stationed in the area.

Finally, the troops now protecting the domestic United States could be relocated to some other station of duty from which they could serve as an effective quick reaction force. That’s right, I’m talking about moving III Corps from Fort Hood, Texas, to Minsk, Belarus. That would comprise moving around 70,000 troops across the Bering Sea, and into what used to be the Soviet Union. This would have the advantage of placating Cold War Ueber-hawks, who always wanted to invade the Soviet Union, it would put the U.S. troops in a place where they could stem the tide of political corruption (another big Murtha talking point lately, so we’d better heed it) and the presence of U.S. troops in Belarus would probably be more warmly received than the presence of Russian troops, which is the historical norm.

Sure, some people might criticize the Murthafication of our defense policy. But what do they know? They are just fat assed people who never served in the military like Karl Rove. Or they didn’t serve in the ‘Nam like Murtha did. Or they don’t have constituents serving in Iraq right now. Or they didn’t get lost under the Capitol yesterday, wander into the Senate cafeteria, and order the Senate Navy Bean Soup like Murtha did. So they don’t know shit and should probably be forbidden from commenting on the issue.

Either that, or we could relocate Rep. Murtha to Novosbirsk, Siberia, Russia, which is about 5,800 miles from Washington, D.C. Sure, it would look like he was being exiled. But if the U.S. forces expected to be able to protect the Middle Eastern oil supply can do so from Okinawa, then surely Mr. Murtha can carry on his good work just as effectively from Siberia. Hell, if he ran on that platform, I’d vote for him.