Dragging our feet
To the Editor:

Right on the heels of President Bush dropping his "stay the course in Iraq" mantra, we began hearing speculation about how long we would be required to remain in Iraq. "Twelve to eighteen months" seems to be the most popular opinion. One of the key elements in the rationale for why it will take so long, is that it will take that long for the Iraq army to get up to speed so they can take over responsibilities currently being performed by the US military. Let me see if I have this right: The US has been training Iraqis to take over, at least since May of 2003 when Mr. Bush declared: "Major combat operations in Iraq have ended - in the Battle of Iraq, the United States and our allies have prevailed." That's three and a

half years. And they need another year and a half? That's five years. How is it that we can take a US high-school graduate, train him for 16 weeks and ship him off to fight in Iraq, when, after three and a half years of training, the Iraqis still need another eighteen months? I don't buy it. Pulling out immediately is probably not logistically possible, but being out of there in six to nine months is, and that should be our target. If we stay any longer it's because we are dragging our feet - which, if Mr. Bush was right back in May of 2003, is exactly what we have been doing for three and a half years.

Cordially, Chuck Esposito

Suches, Ga.