Want to rattle the enemy? Give him a sneak peek at a scary new weapon, pepper his commanders with e-mailed inducements to surrender, fill the airwaves with endless accounts of an awesome American army warming up for warfare. Make something up about his wife having an affair.
Need to rally the folks at home? Question the patriotism of the anti-war crowd, recite a grisly litany of the adversary's atrocities, maybe roll out the trusty comparisons to that mother of all evildoers, Adolf Hitler. Promise peace as the payoff for war.
During World War II, such tactics were called morale and subversion operations. Today, the voguish terms are information warfare and "public diplomacy." But the basic principles of propaganda predate cable television news. They are as old as war itself.
"People painted their faces, wore bearskins to look bigger and intimidating, carried banners, beat drums, chanted slogans," says Susan Brewer, a University of Wisconsin historian and author of To Win The Peace: British Propaganda During World War II.
Experts agree that every word, image, leak and threat being uttered by nearly everyone connected with a war against Iraq is serving some sort of strategic purpose. Some of it works, some it doesn't. Some of it is true, and some of it is deception.
"None of this stuff is incidental," said Scott Gerwehr, an analyst at Rand Corp.
The initial, selective missile strikes on Baghdad ran counter to a US military commander's comments earlier in the day to "shock and awe" the enemy at war's opening with unprecedented firepower, a classic example of using propaganda to deceive.
Since the attacks were aimed at a place where the Iraqi leadership was believed to be holed up, it fit with another propaganda objective: to intimidate the leadership without unduly terrorizing a general population being told it was about to be liberated.
Sometimes, a simple gaffe can be a strategic gift to an enemy. Brewer gives President Bush a "C" for his efforts so far. Polls show he has won the support of most Americans, but alienated much of the world.
His one-time reference to the war on terrorism as a "crusade" was a blunder, seemingly affirming the worst fears of the Muslim community -- That the US agenda was to repeat the Christian Crusades of a millennium ago to supplant Islam in the Holy Lands.
Though the president apologized, such slips have a tendency to stick.
"These things are reproduced as truths, and as permanent truths," said Philip Taylor, a historian at Britain's Leeds University and the author of War and the Media: Propaganda and Persuasion in the Gulf War.
He said reports that the US was already soliciting Iraqi reconstruction bids from a list of entirely American contractors was another inadvertent propaganda plus for Saddam.
Taylor said the suspicion abroad that a war was about making money was not diminished last week when a British lawmaker asked Bush's main ally, Prime Minister Tony Blair, why no British firms were on the list.
Bush may have alienated some key allies, but the most recent polls show a solid majority of Americans back a war on Iraq even without UN approval.
His somber, forceful, State of the Union speech in particular was an accomplished piece of persuasion, said Nancy Snow, a communications professor at California State University and author of the book Propaganda, Inc.
RSS