There's no real valid reason for a congressman to have some sort of set position on "how many soldiers should be stationed in country X" in the first place. That we've reached this point only illustrates the absurdity of the disingenuous Democrat faux-argument re: Iraq in the first place. This reporter made the mistake of taking their phony arguments at face value and trying to pin down their insincere positions.
The notion of Congress trying to write a bill specifying the number of troops that ought to be stationed in a location in which there is ongoing conflict and flux is pretty fricking stupid. Instead of taking the bait and wading into these shallow, shallow waters to discuss the Democrat "position", we should instead be simply ridiculing it for the insular and self-serving political posture that it is.
Brilliant.