Because your comment seemed to indicate a lack of understanding of the military profession.
As you adapted from the harsh reality of that nasty ear problem, the military, as an institution, must adapt to changing social mores. For example, I began my Army service in 1960 when any pregnant service member [regardless of marital status] was discharged. When I retired in 1984, the Army had developed a maternity uniform. That is culture shock.
Despite the changing culture there are fundamentals that do not change. The military justice system, as embodied in the Uniform Code of Military Justice, is one of those fundamentals that evens the playing field.
Although I disagreed with the charges, they passed legal muster. The results of the trial, IMO, reveals that the playing field was evened.
My ire remains directed at legislators, at all levels of government, who foist BS laws upon individuals and institutions.
the current prosecution of soldiers is an ACTIVE action to demoralize our combat effectiveness at the moment of combat. By always having in the back of your mind whether to be an aggressively involved combatant or just sit back, cover your a$$ and hope it all turns out alright is the difference between a warrior and some needle d*cked, pencil pushing REMF.
Of course that's only my opinon and you mileage may differ ....etc. Your other point is correct , I have NO CLUE as to how the Army is as a miltary profession. I wasn't in the Army or a lawyer or an officer.