SASless,
In my not so humble opinion, the telling piece of this article is here;
We are not serious about truly understanding the enemy we face, and as such, an even better remedy for preventing the possible breakdown of the Army and Marine Corps would have been to avoid invading Iraq in the first place. It is of course too late now, but a graceful exit is an option whose time has come. It is high time to regroup and rethink exactly how we are going to defeat radical Islam. As for Iraq, the last thing we should be contemplating is a "surge" that will only compound the ill-advised manner in which we plodded into Iraq. A surge now is a bridge too far. We cannot undo the initial mistakes. Yet President Bush appears stuck between handing an insurgency a victory and remaining in a place where the Iraqi people have rejected the gift of freedom purchased with precious American lives and treasure. And so we remain, running in place and going nowhere.
To paraphrase, this is recognition that you can not fight a conventional war against an unconventional enemy. The appalling logistic backlog is symptomatic of critical resources being misused or deployed in inapproriate or ineffective tactics, and suffering a high attrition rate accordingly. The Brits are stuck in this same quagmire, but they knew when the first IED went off that the rules had changed. They have fallen back on 30 years of intensive counter insurgency training courtesy of Paddy and Mick to try and contain the problem, knowing that the a Military solution alone will not win the day. Any surge by us will be met by an equal and opposite surge by the bad guys, the only consequence will be that the body count (that the White House and Pentagon keep telling us doesn't really matter) will also "surge" on both sides.
Oddly enough, last week that esteemed Public figure, Mr Gerry Adams, of Sinn Fein (for people who couldn't spell terrorist) sat down with Government officials and agreed that Sinn Fein members would obey the rule of law in Ireland (North and South). However skeptical people are of this, it's a damn sight better than than Security forces being targeted and killed every day for 30 years.
The connection with Iraq? The initial groundwork for the Northern Ireland Peace Accord was drafted through the blood sweat and tears of many, but a significant contributor for many years was Senator George Mitchell. So the next time some faceless official from the current adminstration says "we don't negotiate with terrorists" (a) they are a liar, and (b), given the right man, the outcome can be very postive. Whether it is Gerry Adams, Nelson Mandela or a host of others, it took the courage and vision of a few individuals in Leadership to realize the only way out was through peaceful means. I don't yet see those qualifications in anyone up on the Hill, and now we have 3,000 fallen in the US alone as testimony to intransigence being triumphant over personal courage.
So to answer your question, yes the UK is suffering from the same logistics problems, but at least the limited resources seem to be being applied more effectively.