This article over at SF Gate seems more like sensationalism than anything else. The article suggests that we might be able to start reducing our troops in Iraq as early as the first part of 2006, but then they go on to cite other leaders saying we'll be there for many years to come. Can't both be true? Can't we reduce our troops and still stick around and help support them. It's obvious we'll have to stick around for quite some time but it doesn't mean we'll have to be a dominant military force there. Read the full story.