Something's got to give

It's obvious when you read these two stories that something doesn't add up.

First, from the AP:

At the current pace of U.S. deployments to Iraq, the Pentagon may be hard pressed by next year to provide enough reserve combat troops suitable for the mission, judging from the military services' own estimates of available manpower.

The notion of running out of reserve troops would have been dismissed only a year ago, but the strain of fighting a longer, harder war than U.S. commanders foresaw is taking a heavy toll on part-time troops of the Army National Guard, Army Reserve and Marine Corps Reserve.

The problem may ease if, as the Bush administration hopes, security in Iraq improves substantially this year.

Which would all be fine and good except (my bold):

The U.S. Army expects to keep its troop strength in Iraq at the current level of about 120,000 for at least two more years, according to the Army's top operations officer.

While allowing for the possibility that the levels could decrease or increase depending on security conditions and other factors, Lt. Gen. James J. Lovelace Jr. told reporters yesterday that the assumption of little change through 2006 represents "the most probable case."

Add to that this assessment, and things do not look to get better for sometime in Iraq.