I just don't feel the need to proselytize on that like you do. People can make their own decisions on that.

Yes in perfect world it's dangerous, and you wouldn't want it,  but maybe in this weird case, generals are the only solution. It's also a dangerous precedent for the CIA and other intel people to be leaking things to the media that are critical of the president of the U.S., and not following presidential orders and going "rogue" when they don't have adequate supervision, or even pondering ignoring presidential orders, but in this one weird case, it may be what we need. (See a recent David Ignatius for one argument along those lines: The CIA is entering a danger zone. Here’s the map.)

I'm not ashamed of being a relativist, I believe being a relativist is the only rational realistic thing to be.

I probably dislike all things military more than you do, I even hate how that mindset is lauded in like, professional football. In a perfect world we wouldn't have any of it. But we don't live in a perfect world.

Another thing I think would be ideal: if people didn't proselytize simplistic answers and instead tried to promote understanding nuance and complexity, which reporters like Tom Ricks try to supply on all things Pentagon and related. I keep hoping.