Firn:
This one-sided view of the greater part of the public in many countries only confirms once again that it is very difficult to handle potential, likely and possible incidents which impact goals and lifes.
Very true, though I suggest this is an excellent example of the 'trial by media' that UBoat 509 properly objected to...

It is the media take or acceptance of the Wikileaks message and it will influence some readers or viewers. I still contend the majority of people in the areas you mention will not really care.

Sebee
I have taken part in a few operations as a lowly other rank where only years later, with the help of google, have I had anything near a clear picture of what we did, the reasons behind it and the "bigger picture"
I've had the same experience but I've also discovered that in some cases, the "bigger picture" as later reported was itself incorrect. I guess I'd say "Yep but be careful, some 'history' is flawed..." Generally to make a political or ideological point.

PolarBear1605:
The question then becomes if we are not hunting down and killing insurgents are we causing more civilian deaths then compared to civilian deaths committed out of military necessity?
Yes, almost certainly. That allows me to use my favorite quote:

"War means fighting. The business of the soldier is to fight. Armies are not called out to dig trenches, to live in camps, but to find the enemy and strike him; to invade his country, and do him all possible damage in the shortest possible time. This will involve great destruction of life and property while it lasts; but such a war will of necessity be of brief continuance, and so would be an economy of life and property in the end."

Thomas J. Jackson quoted by G. F. R. Henderson