[stuartcr]

I still can't completely understand why it is ok to kill someone one way, but not another?...the end result is the same

[demlosers]

Yes, a logical disconnect.

[oldenuff2no]

I'm a retired Ranger and I will tell you the truth that most don't want to hear.
Any military officer worth his salt will do whatever it takes to defeat the enemy and to keep his men safe and alive while doing so.
This is his obligation to his troops. This is why they will blindly follow a leader into battle. Each solider knows that his CO is worried about his butt and places his life above that of the enemy.
That's war, and that's the loyalty and trust that each person must have in their superiors.

[elfman2]

" I still can't completely understand why it is ok to kill someone one way, but not another?...the end result is the same"

One’s justified by the cause of defense, the other is not.

[af_vet_rr]

I still can't completely understand why it is ok to kill someone one way, but not another?...the end result is the same

Because we are signatories to certain international treaties and conventions, and because we consider ourselves an honorable and noble country, we try to keep our word.

If we choose to disregard the agreements that we have signed our names to, then we are basically telling the world we are not to be trusted nor should we be respected.

There is a reason why some of our strongest allies were once our enemies, even as recently as sixty years ago. It's because we are an honorable nation, and they recognize that.

These kinds of events - putting this officer on trial, etc., this isn't about the war on terror or the war in Iraq - it's about 200+ years of history and how we have conducted ourselves.