A friend forwarded a link to this NYTimes article which claims the Marines are upset about implicitly the Bush administration denying them armor and needed manpower in Iraq. As a Vietnam War veteran, he was outraged at the Bush administration at this stuff. Subsequently I found this blog post which did the homework on the NYTimes article only to find that the real issue is interservice communication problems not civilian decision making.
I told him that this is a common pattern for the NYTimes. It selects and produces content in order to produce outrage at the political enemies of its readers. Clarifying details are often left absent. Recall that the first NYTimes coverage of the swift boats was an incredibly one-sided article about its funding rather than its claims. Recall the NYT coverage of the Al Qaqaa arms depot from just before the election that turned out to be entirely bogus.
The NYTimes provides value to its readers by making them believe they are reading all the news that is fit to print while actually providing all the news that fits their worldview.
If something in the the NYT is making you see red, don’t assume that your anger is actually justified. Its more likely just dramatic entertainment.