Why magnificent?

You know, I'm not even going to touch this one. The whole thing is ridiculous. These are six NCO's and an enlisted man, all from the same combat unit. They don't exactly have the big-picture context to really be making these kinds of determinations. The thing, though, that really gets me is that the New York Times is printing this op-ed from these seven. How many have they published from soldiers who believe the war can be won.

The Magnificent Seven
Soldiers pen a jaw-dropping NYT op-ed about the war in Iraq
Slate

In April 2006, six retired generals called for then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld's resignation. In May of this year, Lt. Col. Paul Yingling, an active-duty officer, wrote an article lambasting the Army's general officer corps as lacking "professional character" and "moral courage." Now, just last Sunday, seven infantrymen and noncommissioned officers - all finishing their 15-month tours in Iraq with the 82nd Airborne Division - took to the New York Times op-ed page to dismiss prospects of victory as "far-fetched" and recent appraisals of progress as "flawed" and "surreal."

This last insiders' protest is the most jaw-dropping and may ultimately be the most potent. It is unusual enough to see officers - active or retired - publicly denouncing their military superiors or civilian leaders for mistakes or deficiencies in wartime. But for NCOs - none higher in rank than staff sergeant - to air their contrary views on the war (and, implicitly, their sour views of high-ranking policy-makers) is, as far as I can tell, unprecedented: an act of, depending on your politics, great courage or outright subordination - or, perhaps, both.