John Kerry's Silver Star is questioned because he is accused of shooting a fleeing, wounded, enemy soldier in the back. In a war where huge amounts of napalm and Agent Orange were dropped from airplanes, the US is concerned that an identifiable and armed enemy soldier was shot in the back? Is the US concerned that soldiers, in a hostile environment, shoot first, intimidate the rest and only use diplomacy when they're sure no one's going to shoot them? The US populace is aware that there are huge numbers of casualties in a war, most of them undeserved? Does the US expect soldiers to behave like civilian police?

We should be glad John Kerry didn't shoot a civilian because of something that looked like a gun. Or am I missing something?