Friday, March 28, 2003

The Money Question

Kevin Drum asks the question that's been on my mind lately:

One thing I haven't seen much discussion of is why Rumsfeld and Cheney are so wedded to the idea of war on the cheap. Did they really think they would have a harder time getting approval for military action if it turned out to cost $150 billion instead of $75 billion? Or are they thinking ahead to other wars? Or were they worried about leaving a few divisions intact in case we needed them somewhere else? What's the motivation here? Why not just let the brass send in half a million troops and get the job done?

I have a couple of ideas, but nothing I'm too sure about.

On a related note, for the people with higher military IQs than me, is there even the remotest possibility that the claims that calling up an additional 100,000 troops was all part of the Cunning Plan?