Well that really clears things up

Today's Post includes a piece by Karen DeYoung on White House debates about increasing troop numbers in Afghanistan. Anonymous senior officials are also quoted on the subject of strategic direction, specifically whether or not the president is concerned by or interested in the recent criticisms of withdrawal advocates like George Will and Russ Feingold.

But this official and others, who agreed to speak about the upcoming national security discussions on the condition of anonymity, gave no indication that withdrawal would be seriously considered. "There's not a lot of rethinking that the strategy we have pretty much worked on to go forward with needs some drastic or dramatic revision," a second official said.

"We can't deny that they've had their successes," the second official said of the Taliban. But McChrystal's recommendations are "all in the scope of how do you refine your tactics, not your strategy."

Uh, what? The first sentence seems to indicate that there's consensus that "the strategy we have pretty much worked on... needs some... revision," right? But then the second part tells us what (I thought) we already knew, which is that the administration is considering new tactical approaches but not the strategic necessity of continued involvement.

So what exactly is this guy saying?