The bombing missions were straight up mass murder. Dead is dead. McCain is a war criminal and it’s too bad he won’t be executed for his crimes before he dies. Dodging the draft was heroic. If everyone had done it this horrible massacre wouldn’t have happened. I spit on the grave of every American piece of **** that died over there. ****ing worthless cowards. **** all of them.

To be fair, it's more like expecting 0 drunk driving incidents in a state where it's illegal to buy, sell or consume alcohol. Numbers would drop significantly, but there would still be the odd one. So, yes the laws are effective if they're enforced on a large scale and not just in certain counties or regions of a state/nation.

As far as war and murder goes, I have to somewhat agree that you're basically going in with the knowledge that you're going to be killing someone else, and that's why it absolutely has to be a last resort and not a step before. If people's safety and your own safety is at risk, then that's when it's time and the problem with Vietnam is that there were so many lies told about our involvement. Until years after, the lie was that Vietnam sunk one of our ships until it was proven that the Johnson Administration lied. Also, we were bombing all of Southeast Asia for the most part which the public had no idea of, so it wasn't just Vietnam but Laos, Cambodia, Burma, etc.

Lisna, the whole reason I shared that Tokyo Rose vid was to illustrate that McCain embellished his time as a POW. It throws that whole narrative you cited on Wikipedia into question. What he told officials in government privately and the story that was sold to the American people don't completely line up. As far as I'm concerned, he and the government puffed up the story to distract from his war crimes + the fact he likely sang like a bird to his captors before any torture was actually done to him (assuming we take his own account at face value, which I don't).

Trump is fundamentally right about him even if you don't align with that sentiment.

^ That's prob true, but isn't this equation true too:-

Strategic attacks to weaken N Vietnam's military=reducing their ability to attack S Vietnamese and US soldiers

I would've thought so, yes. The main object of destroying a bridge is to reduce troop movements, for example.

As I say, sadly, that's true.

^ Not sure what this question is about. Are you suggesting that any US soldier serving in Vietnam was ipso facto a war criminal?

By killing them.

Poll: how many wrongs make a right?

No. I'm suggesting that any soldier serving in any war is a war criminal.

^ I guess my reasoning is this; being a soldier is a horrible job that can involve risking your life, but when you sign up to be a soldier you accept that you will follow orders. In ways difficult to measure, in Britain and the US, we enjoy the benefits of having a standing army, even if it's only for when they are flying in hurricane relief supplies. Because it's a hard, lousy dangerous job, I'm prepared to accord them some respect even if they've been sent to fight in a war of dubious morality.

I'm surprised that Trump doesn't appreciate his armed forces more: it's a very unusual leader who denigrates the people who, in the worst of cases, would die to defend the country he leads.

^ Carpet bombing of cities could be described as mass murder - strategic bombing of bridges and arms depots, not so much.
Completely failing to understand McCain's role at My Lai. Sorry.

^ Well, thank you for that explanation Anteater.

^ Well that's an unusual position that I'll mull over for another day if you don't mind.

I guess if they serve and don't kill anyone, they can be charged with conspiracy to commit a war crime.

Agree

He went Freddy Krueger in that mother****er. That’s why he got arrested.