Yes. I'm sure milesokeefe suggested it because discontinuing a product and then relaunching it is standard practice for companies which want to get rid of anchoring biases.
(And I'm not sure I'd say that trying to evade cognitive biases is a "trick", really.)
I think it's better for smart people not to have patronizing attitudes about the rest of humanity, but that's just me.
I also think that charitable gestures towards men risking their lives and suffering great hardship to protect entire civilizations are categorically a different thing from a commercial product. I think the troops probably felt this way as well, which is really the crux of the whole issue, isn't it?
There's a massive difference between "here's a little something to say thanks for fighting for our country" and "doughnuts for sale"--and one is hardly a substitute for the other.
There's a massive difference between "here's a little something to say thanks for fighting for our country"
Why should that gesture be coming from the Red Cross, an organisation that's supposed to transcend nationalities and help all people regardless of politics?
You're probably confusing the International Committee of the Red Cross (which is the organization you're describing) with the American Red Cross (which is explicitly American, and assists US troops overseas along with other charitable activities).
As for the moral value of providing a gesture of thanks to people who are literally fighting the Nazis, I'll let you work that out for yourself.
The troops probably have the same range of intelligence as everybody else. And the PR problem is mainly with those on one end of the continuum, not the other.