McGrath, it would be great if the "Golden Rule," applied in war. But then on the ohter hand, if the "Golden Rule,' applied, there probably wouldn't be any war.

If, I repeat from an earlier posting, Kerry believed that he could not lead his squad back safely without killing potential members of the Viet Cong, I believe he was justified in doing whatever he did.

I also mentioned Dresden earlier. In that raid in WW2, thousands of innocent German civilians died. Is the fact that Kerry's group may (or may not) have gathered the group of civilians together and shot them, any worse than what the bomber crews did during WW2 over Dresden or numerious other targets? The Nazi's sent unmanned bombs over London during WW2 and killed thousands of innocent civilians.

What, my friends, is the difference between what Kerry's squad may have done, than the bomber crews from England and the U. S. and the Nazi's did in WW2?

War has no favorites. Unfortunately, in any war, innocent people are killed.

DougR