@1-300,000
On the contrary, Trevor richly deserves the thumbs-down for using the massively abused "support our troops" argument at the start of the comments. The only thing in his favor is that he didn't continue with the ".. because we can't tell them it was all for nothing" corollary, though he did take a step in that direction with the fatuous argument that we're there because we care about the Afghans. Perhaps we do, but that's not why we're there. In fact nobody seems to know why we're there. Well obviously some people know, but they're not saying, and the regular media is complicit not so much in in banging the war drums and covering up - though some are - but in suppressing dissent, for what reasons I can only speculate. Even the New York Times, which published the initial Wikileaks, is part of this publishers' cabal. Last week it published an editorial similar to Trevor's first comment and incautiously opened a comment thread, which was prematurely closed after less than 100 comments were submitted, almost all of which were strongly negative.
As a commentard with a son-in-law in harm's way, I strongly believe the best way to "support our troops" is to get them out of there. This appears to me to be the majority view of the citizens of the "democracies" involved in this imbroglio. How are we supposed to get our so-called "representatives" to pay attention, except by embarrassing them in every way possible? Go Assange, go Wikileaks. Extra credits if you can find and publish the order to let Bin Laden get away.