Well I saw his WIFE this AM on GMA, she was neither worried or uneasy at all about his safety. If fact she was quite smug and talked about how proud she was at what he did.
A wife has a husband at war and you think she's not worried about his safety? Can you hear yourself? If she's proud of what he did, it's because she thinks it will bring her husband better armament sooner. Wanting our troops better armed is hardly an unpatriotic motive.
The one I heard on the radio was his EX-wife. She was not at all surprised by his question or direct attitude. Perhaps you misunderstood her reaction, if this was the same woman.
From my stand point we have the wrong tool, with the wrong edge, doing their best at the wrong job.
Armies aren't for "nation building".
Humvee's weren't designed to do this work; nor designed to be quickly modified and neither were the troops. They are doing a yeoman's job, but we should have had a better monopoly on violence at the end of the war. To avoid civilian causalities, and perhaps in hope of a better nature amongst the liberated, we waged a "modern" war and not a Sherman War: a war to take their will and ability to wage war away.
Masefield is telling a straight truth, you go with what you have. Soldiers can take the truth. Civilians can't, and won't.