Seeing a lot of expressions of concern for "The Troops" from the very same people in my timeline who promoted the Iraq War, the Afghan War (Year 19), Operation Syrian Freedom, and who rebuked Trump for not bombing Iran ... many principled norms being whithered, now, thankfully.
Remember that @TheAtlantic supported "The Troops" so much that it had David "Axis of Evil" Frum write this hit piece on Tulsi Gabbard, who, before she was accused by Hillary & Co of being a Russian agent, served in a a Medical Unit in Balad & remains a serving US Army reservist 
One of the strangest parts of the last 20 years has been the memory-holing of Iraq & Afghanistan. To some degree, unless you or your loved ones were in it, it probably is an event worth memory holing, really. But no one who pushed it suffered...just the killed & the wounded.
After the disaster at Gallipoli, Winston Churchill went and served in 1916, as a penance, with the Royal Scots Fusiliers on the western front. Nowadays, our contemporary laptop bombardiers move from green room to green room, pushing new stupid wars in irrelevant places.
Those who want to support "The Troops" should ask why "The Troops" are sent, repeatedly, to meddle, hopelessly, in regions of peripheral strategic concern to remediate problems whose solution was beyond Tsars, Kings, Shahs & Sultans (each with more competent advisers than now)
I do try, always, to be as polite as one can be here, but the sight of people - who have been the most reckless and thoughtless advocates of the most mindless wars - now posing as tribunes of "The Troops", is nothing sort of sickening. And no sensible person should be fooled.
