OG:

I don't get it 0-- you raise a rhetorical question about Clinton and Haliburton (presumably) and cite for evidence a piece from somewhere that includes the exact explanation that answers the question you ask. What the hell is your point? The explanation of the administration's rationale is right there in the citation you provided, so why the hell are you asking? Even if the explanation is bogus, it just goes to support the argument that Dick Cheney is an underhanded manipulator and a powermonger with little conscience.
I doubt Clinton had much or anything at all to do with the management of whatever contracts were let for logistics in the Balkans. As a rule, that sort of contract management is done about ten levels down the organization from the President.

A