"Supporting" the soldier necessarily means sharing his desire for victory. From this perspective, there is an inherent contradiction in claiming to "support" the soldier while taking actions that undercut his efforts.
Amid talk of a new arms race, Americans should know more about what billions of their tax dollars are paying for. It's likely that DARPA projects will simply lead to needless expenditures on weapons designed for wars the U.S. won't fight.
This sort of description of the U.S. military has become something of a must for American presidents. What does such triumphalist rhetoric suggest not just about our national narcissism, but Washington's priorities?