This might get a lot of down votes but I want to say I don't think it's fair to blame the soldiers in the field for the choices of the decision makers in the office. Those horrible events were unwanted 'byproducts' of the goal of men with evil plans, they were not veterans going off-book. In other words, these veterans did what was asked of them. I'm not saying they didn't do some very bad things, but they aren't the people that should be 'thanked'.
Ahh, yes, the mindless drone argument.
In the aftermath of World War II, Carl Jaspers formulated in Die Schuldfrage that there are four types of guilt (/responsibility). Criminal guilt, political guilt, moral guilt, and metaphysical guilt. It is a great distinction in general. Yes, political leaders bear a different kind of guilt for the actions than the soldiers, but acting on clearly morally wrong commands do not obliterate guilt from the soldiers. Just like everyone who basically didn't give their life in pursuit of the good and the right bears some metaphysical guilt for what is happening in the world.
Edit: I realized that, since I am neither an English native, nor very articulate in philosophy or politics, I would rather ask perplexity for a summary. So here it is: Karl Jaspers, in his work The Question of German Guilt, distinguishes four categories of guilt and assigns specific instances to each:
Criminal Guilt:
Definition: Violations of objectively provable laws that are legally considered crimes.
Instance: The court, which determines the facts and applies the laws in formal proceedings.
Political Guilt:
Definition: Arises from the actions of statesmen and the shared responsibility of every citizen for the government of their state.
Instance: The power and will of the victor, especially after a lost war, as in the case of Germany after World War II.
Moral Guilt:
Definition: Refers to individual actions for which every person is morally responsible, even if carried out under orders.
Instance: Oneβs own conscience and dialogue with others.
Metaphysical Guilt:
Definition: A shared responsibility for all injustice in the world, based on human solidarity. It arises when one does not do everything possible to prevent injustice.
Instance: God or transcendence.
Jaspers emphasizes that this differentiation is meant to avoid simplistic or generalized accusations of guilt. He rejects the idea of collective criminal or moral guilt for an entire people, arguing that guilt is always individual.
In other words, these veterans did what was asked of them.
They could just have not.
ACAB includes the troops. Going to foreign countries to shoot brown kids doesn't make you any less of a bastard than doing it at home.
No no no. None of this should be acknowledged, because Whataboutism.