Oh, great... so now the plan which the administration has been talking about for months doesn't exist. Now how am I to believe that one?
Anonymous sources have been talking about a plan. The administration hasn't.
There is a difference...
You must be one of those "living in an alternate universe" people. In the universe where I live, the administration has not been "talking about" a plan to invade Iraq "for months". I don't even know where you get that. If this is what you believe, then tell me: When will the invasion take place? How will the invasion be handled? Who will be involved, where will the support come from, what countries will be used as staging areas, what is their exit strategy, what is their post-victory strategy, what contingency plans are they making?
After all, you seem to think the "administration" has been "talking about" this "plan" for "months". So presumably you know plenty of military details about their "plan" to invade Iraq. Well, spill it!
Please don't misunderstand me. It's not that I'm saying that We Won't Invade Iraq at all. I reckon that we will. But it's premature to talk about (and criticize) the "plan", whatever it is or isn't, without actually knowing any details whatsoever! I mean get real, all we have are a bunch of dubious leaks to the freakin' New York Times! You're telling me it makes sense to look at those leaks/planted stories and sniff, "I don't like their plan at all, it's so bad"? I really hope you understand what I'm trying to say because I'm really getting tired of saying it.
The administration may indeed attack Iraq, sometime, in some way. But neither you nor I nor this columnist know any solid facts about their "plan" for doing it (if, indeed, such a "plan" exists), and so it's just plain stupid to start carping about how Their Plan Is So Dubious and all that.