You know, it just occured to me...
I'm reading a 2,500 year history of the struggle between East and West - Egyptians, Greeks, Persians, Christians/Muslims, etc.
Vietnam atrocity is consistent with many but not all other wars. It seems to depend on the leadership whether or not things turn barbaric - which is why some U.S. leaders during Vietnam should be on trial (but let's not go there). By comparison, Iraq and Afghanistan have been conducted squeeky clean. I think that relates to our outright military superiority AND a generally more civilized society. But you can afford to be civilized when you have such vastly superior forces - if the shoe were on the other foot I assume we could fight just as dirty as anyone. So I'm not so sure about moral superiority being ingrained or genetic or anything. I think it more depends on several other things; like economy, history of conflict, neighbors, etc.
Where was I? I'm rambling.
Carry on - Turd out.
I will say one thing though. John Kerry is a man of strong character and great strength. It's no surprise he got five medals. It's heroic stuff - see link. But then, heroism is common in combat.
Swift Boaters: they're just sad.
snopes.com: John Kerry's Service Record
PS: NK with nukes is bad for everyone, including North Koreans. NK has a history of selling arms to terrorists and other devils - plus, they are allies with China - China is sleeping devil that could lead to WWIII. I think NK's a bigger problem than Iran. Iran is nuking-up strictly for self-defense, IMO. Anyone would after seeing neighbors to both the east and west invaded by the same country that subverted your own democracy and constantly rattles the sabre. Iran's suffering under ancient conquest is also still in their minds, believe it or not. Iran has ample reason to want nukes. North Korea doesn't. They have China protecting them. Their motives for having nukes could be far worse.