I've been following Yon online for some time now, including his personal crusade on this particular issue. His "beef" stems from, IIRC, the death of a soldier on a patrol he was observing. The marked, army MEDEVAC helo was delayed, according to Yon, by hierarchy concerns over the security on planned LZ. This compared markedly with the Air Force Pedro rescue helicopters that would come into a "hot el zee" (to quote a thousand war films) armed and unmarked to extract the casualty. The casualty died in the field whilst the hierarchy discussed the matter. Pedros weren't available however Yon asserts that, based on his not inconsiderable experience, had they been then they would have launched, extracted and possibly saved the casualty without a protracted discussion on the matter. He wants to know why the army are so self-restricting when the AF aren't.
He has had questions asked in Congress on the matter, has recently featured on CBS etc discussing the issue and is generally creating waves and annoying yet more Generals - something he has an impressive track record of.
I agree with him to a certain extent although a) I know nothing of big balls helicopter flying and b) he can be a bit of a knob end at times. He does argue some good points but is colossally self important and doesn't take kindly to those who field alternate yet valid viewpoints.
Personally I think marking up a helicopter when operating against a dark ages enemy is just asking for trouble. Claiming moral superiority by painting your rescue cabs with red crosses is all terribly right-on and super but does just make it jolly easy for your non-latte drinking non-SoCal enemy to shoot you down.
I'd vote for no markings and lots of miniguns - it evens things up and doesn't give the bleeding heart bed wetters back home anything to fret about.