At this point we are cut-and-pasting some sort of Gummint there. Delivery date is June. But our military stays until March 05, right? Hmmmmm.
But we have three distinct nations: the Kurds, the Baathists, and the Shiites; exactly how long will our military be required to keep those factions apart? And WHY is it OUR military, and Britain's (and a few stragglers)?
The alternative, of course, is simply to admit that we intend to keep a large garrison in Iraq forever, to replace what we lost in Saudi, as a power-projection necessity.
But nobody's admitted that, yet.
What's the rush? We ran Germany until '49, and Japan until 1952 - in light of that, I really don't think we have much room to critique a two year plan as being too slow. If, at that point, stability looks like a reasonable outcome, and the Iraqis want us out, we should go. If they're amenable, and we can gain another Rammstein or Okinawa out of it, so much the better - the fight against terrorism isn't over, and I happen to like the idea of taking it to them, rather than sitting back and waiting for them to sucker-punch us again.