Scafite, two points:
First plagarism. OK, you do refer indirectly to the orign of your quote but it would have been polite to attribute it and show it was a straight quote. You could either use " " or [quo te] [/quot e] (remove the spaces).
Secondly logistics is not a PITA. One reason the Dardanells campaign began as a fiasco was it started as a naval operation with the army planned to garrison the defeated Turks; it was not planned as an amphibious assault. The logisitcs organisation was completely wrong footed by both the plan and how it evolved.
I think we all know that without logisitics nothing else amounts to a string of beans - the aircraft that deploy without weapons and are wholly dependent of the in theatre supply of fuel and weapons - the troops that deploy with rations and equipment that they can carry which will last for bare days - the fleet without the train etc.
You argue that spare spares be returned to UK over the next 2 years. But a useable spare in theatre may be required tomorrow. You also suggest
any spare space needs to be filled on a slow programe of returns.
but occupied space equals weight and weight equals fuel. To uplift a greater weight out of theatre more fuel will need to be trucked (or flown) in which in turn would reduce the inbound payload.
The wholly is a carefully balanced act that despite the lack of the right equipment (a different argument) seems to be a remarkably successful with water, fuel, food and ammunition being delivered in sufficient quantities.
Another aspect you have not touched is 'other nations' that will be facing a similar issue. The very tenuous exit corridors will, like the Berlin airlift, need full international cooperation and coordination.