One point that bears looking into is that the soldiers interviewed are motivated regardless of and independent of what their civilian leaders are saying. This may be a good thing – soldiers are supposed ot be apolitical, but it says something about the civic culture of the country. basically it says that military people expect civilians to be venal, selfish, confused and unreliable. A Rumsfeld, with his corporate emphasis on cost cutting, sending people into combat before their vehicles were properly armored, trying to cut benefits, is tolerated, because, hey, what else can you expect – the guy’s a civilian. It may be wondrous ad stirring to se such seflessness, but it is the first step on a bad road. It is not at all good to have people with weapons acting the adult around people they perceive to be childish. This is how feudal societies get legtimated, at least in the minds of the aristocrats. And it is quite beside the point who holds the purse strings, it matters who is holding the gun to the head. The country needs to get it’s head around the notion of military service as a general duty of every citizen. We have no use for a draft, but we cannot afford this separation of the military from the general public. It is profoundly anti-democratic.