Endless war

Everyone seems to be talking about Obama's decision to deploy 30,000 more troops in Afghanistan.

I've been hearing opinions from all over today, with Republicans whining that the 18 month deployment isn't long enough, and Democrats whining that 100,000 troops is just too many. It's not that they are both extreme with the truth somewhere in the middle, but rather that both parties are packed with complete and utter morons.

100,000 troops is too many? Hah! We should be committing 200,000 troops, and not for 18 months, but for 9 months.

The numbers here exceed intuitive evaluation, so let's scale it down to where we can look at it. You're about to enter a free-for-all fights against a half-dozen guys. You can either have a team of 10 guys in for 18 minutes, or 20 guys in for 9 minutes. Which fight sounds better to you? Or, to put it another way -- if you haven't beaten them in 9 minutes, are you actually planning to win?

Then again, I'm not a political analyst, and any plan that simultaneously pisses off Michael Moore and Karl Rove has already done some good. I hope that this pans out the way it is supposed to, for everyone's sakes.