The U.S. military is undergoing a transformation. The idea is to create a rapidly-moving force. Along the way, a decision was made to spend billions on fighter planes and “information technology.” Not so much on armor.

The information technology, in particular, has proven incredibly useful in telling our armorless troops exactly where to go to die.

And, as Rumsfeld told the troops in Kuwait, armored vehicles still get blown up anyway. — Tom Donnelly, Donald Rumsfeld’s War (December 19, 2004) CBS “News.”

Pointing out that more troops are killed when they’re sent in without the necessary armor and other supplies necessary to fight a war is useless.

“I’m sure that some of the people that are stuck in the past don’t want to see the military transformed.” — No Byline (because, after all, who wants people to know they’re responsible for “news” these days?), Rumsfeld Under Fire From GOP, ¶ 8 (December 19, 2004) CBS “News.”

Besides,

Heavily armored ground forces, in particular, were too ponderous and therefore vulnerable in the emerging age of “netwar” with al Qaeda and spectacularly “enabled” leaders like Osama bin Laden. — No Byline (because, after all, who wants people to know they’re responsible for “news” these days?), Rumsfeld Under Fire From GOP ¶ 2 (December 19, 2004) CBS “News.”

Rumsfeld has forgotten one thing: Al Queda and bin Laden can afford to go it without armor because they don’t care if their troops die. After all, some of those troops are venturing into the midst of their enemies covered in explosives, so they can detonate themselves. No need for armor there.

Or did he forget? Maybe the men who lied and manipulated Americans in order to start a(nother) war in the face of resistance not just from Iraqis, but the entire world, don’t actually care how many of our sons and daughters die, either. I mean, it’s not like they’re sending their own kids.

On the other hand, maybe this is how Rummy gets his more mobile, rapidly-deployed forces: He figures if he withholds their armor, they’ll run faster.