No, I don't expect veterans to be written off just because they are veterans, but by the same token I don't like the idea of them being singled out for special attention either.
It is your perception that they are being singled out without justification. Given the McVey event, the view by those charged with preventing another McVey-like event is that those trained by the military are potentially more likely to be successful than the average disgruntled yahoo with enough cash to buy some ingredients to make a large bomb. You are correct, McVey did bring this on.
Unfortunately YOUR logic is flawed
And you have bad breath. There.
Could have, would have, should have is no argument, there are just as many civilians out there that can and do handle the ANFO that was used in Oak City, yet they are not singled out as the vets were.
Again, there are several general descriptions of types of people, civilians, that are noted as worthy of watching, not just veterans. Read the report.
Jim the problem is not with the service men and women, it's with the fact that they were singled out. There are far more disgruntled people on the outside of the military than there are on the inside.
And the report does not suggest the people in the military now are the ones to watch. It is the ones who have come back to a situation where they feel alienated by the same issues that have other civilians behaving in ways that appear threatening. It is not an "all veterans" issue, just like it is not an "all guys with shaved heads and guns" issue. It is ones that don't have or can't hold jobs, who are isolated from society, etc. McVey was cited as being a "lone wolf" type, which is a trigger. Having skills is another distinguishing feature. It is not persecuting veterans - it is recognizing patterns of behavior in the general population, which includes veterans, and when they meet some of the other criteria for being suspect, their training makes them more of a threat.
But you know all that already.