continuing the permanent war

So I was reading the latest comments by William Kristol on opposition in Congress to the escalation of hostilities in Iraq, and they sounded a bit familiar:

It’s so irresponsible that they can’t be quiet for six or nine months and say the president has made a decision, we’re not going to change that decision, we’re not going to cut off funds and insist on the troops coming back, so let’s give it a chance to work.

(Emphasis mine.)  I kept getting that tickle in the back of my brain, so I searched this very same blog for the phrase “six months” and found something eerily familiar:

Six months.  Just let this play out.

Date written?  May 2006, about “six to nine months” ago.  (Follow that link for a similar chain of six-month timelines, stretching back to 2003.)  How many more six-to-nine-month extensions are we going to be asked for?  How many thousand-death promissory notes?