Do you think the "why" has anything to do with the blow-back DuPont experienced as a consequence of manufacturing napalm during the Vietnam War?

DOD has extremely talented strategists, and an infinite simulation budget. Without considering the willingness of the workforce to do as directed without question, I can't see a reason this would be in the long-term US strategic interest (as conceptualized within DOD).

Or, have the strategic questions been subordinated to political ones in the absence of a peer adversary?