Training Security Forces: Numbers aren't making sense

Afghanistan says it will take about 5 years to train "about" 50,000 security forces.

Wow. But in Iraq, "they" say it has taken "just a few months" to train 100K. Subsequently 40,000 resigned, and the actual number of trained Iraqs "might be" on the order of magnitude of 5,000.

Whatever the actual numbers, it is striking that Afghanistan is talking in terms of years, while Iraq seems to not quite stand still.

Let's assume both are telling the truth. If things are "really going well with the training in Iraq," it would stand to reason that the "excellent results" could also be applied to Afghanistan, prompting us to ask:

Security Trianing If things are going to well in Iraq, why isn't Afghanistan doing the same thing? Why is there such a wide disparity in time estimates between Afghanistan and Iraq? If the security situation in Iraq is truly "that bad," then why aren't Iraqis simply shipped out to Afghanistan for training? If on the other hand, "there's something with inadequate troops in Afghanistan" and the "pool of recruits is smaller," why not put Iraqis to work and train them in Iraq to serve in Afghanistan? Why is Afghanistan talking in terms of years while Iraq is talking as if the problem is either "not a problem," or will be solved in a matter of months?