Doubling down, bound for bust?

The Obama administration appears ready to make their move, and it's not to cut the losses from the "classic blunder"* of the Bush Administration:

Mr. Obama is likely to formally approve additional deployments this week, and Pentagon officials hope the full complement of 20,000 to 30,000 new troops will be on the ground by the end of the summer, pushing the U.S. military presence to its highest level since the start of the war in 2001.

This would roughly double the U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan. A few things worth noting:

* A brigade deployed to Afghanistan is twice as expensive to maintain as a brigade in Iraq. Resupply, as you might have guessed, is the primary issue.

* The major supply routes through Pakistan are coming under increasing attack by militants (they may be barbarous cretins, but even they can figure out logistical weaknesses, given enough time)

* Our major air hub in the region, Manas Air Base, may not be accessible for much longer. Seems Kyrgystan is one of a growing list of countries where we've worn out our welcome.

So, to recap: we're about to double our troop strength in an area of operations that is twice as expensive to run as Iraq, at a time when our adversaries are finally focused on our very long supply lines and an erstwhile ally appears to be bowing to pressure from Moscow to roll up the welcome mat. This appears custom-tailored to produce an American version of the Teutenburg Forest debacle. Let's hope in the years ahead we don't hear our uniformed leaders cursing "Obama, give me back my legions!" Given all this, it bears asking again: what's the end we have in mind???

(* Thanks, Will... couldn't resist including that reference...)