Good to see that you backed anything up with facts, instead of saying "no." Prove that they promoted and fully explained the sharing system and its benefits, along with how it would function, re: synchronous play. Link me the article explaining the rules and restrictions on joining a family (or multiple families).
It's not just having sub-par internet in the military. It's many rural areas and military bases that could not access the Internet dependably. It can also happen that a college campus can lose its Internet for a period of time (my school did, though I think it was only for a day, if even that). The problem isn't just that it was an inconvenience, either. It turned a $500 investment into a useless paperweight for no good reason that wasn't avoidable.
If you REALLY want to blame anyone though, blame Microsoft. They refused to clarify the situation. They refused to put any effort into making a system that worked for everyone. It wouldn't have been that difficult to take the initial system and add a disc-based check-in as a backup. Basically, they could have taken the new (well, old), disc-based system, and made it a secondary addition to the digital one, and it would have solved the offline issues while not hurting those who liked the prospect of sharing games and were OK with needing a frequent Internet connection. So call it "babies crying" because people want to be able to play the consoles that they purchase, and I'll say that you're the petty one.