Based on the "what do you think" wording of the question, you can feel free to take a personal stance on why Crane organized this poem in this manner and defend it. I think a good place to start is by pointing out that the indentations of stanzas 2 and 4 really call them to attention. Essentially, Crane is forcing readers to notice that stanzas 2 and 4 are different than stanzas 1, 3, and 5. They are indented, and their length is longer than the other stanzas as well. Savvy poetry readers should then look deeper into those stanzas. They aren't simply structurally different. They focus on a different topic, audience, and location. Stanzas 1, 3, and 5 are being spoken to specific people. The people are loved ones of soldiers who have died in battle. The indented stanzas then move readers to a wider angle. We have been transported to a battlefield filled with booming noises and thousands of soldiers. The indented stanzas are much wider in scope than the other more intimate stanzas.

The indented second and fourth stanzas of "War is Kind" serve as a kind of chorus. They provide a generalized account of the horrors of war and the terrible effect they have on ordinary soldiers. Crane subtly cross-cuts these anti-war stanzas with the ironic first, third, and fifth stanzas, in which the narrator tries to offer comfort to the bereaved women by describing the heroism of their menfolk as they died in battle.

The indented stanzas are used by Crane to provide a withering commentary on the commonly accepted notion of war as glorious and heroic. The eye-catching paraphernalia of battle—the fluttering flag of the regiment and the impressive eagle insignia—cannot hide the cold reality of war, with all the horrifying bloodshed it entails:

Swift blazing flag of the regiment,
Eagle with crest of red and gold,
These men were born to drill and die.
Point for them the virtue of slaughter,
Make plain to them the excellence of killing
And a field where a thousand corpses lie.