Most are mixing up 'moral' and 'principle' positions. Getting morally upset at the incident is perfectly fair- most humans would be, at such a sad loss. By that yardstick, war itself is immoral. But thats a very different discussion. Would not all of us like to ban war? But thirst for 'revenge' when a terror attack kills a number of our citizens- then we are all baying for blood!! So much for a 'moral' position. I am discussing the principles involved in the incident. If we leave the morality of war by the side, the sub Cdr saw a belligerent warship in international waters and is duty bound to attack it else he is liable to courtmartial proceedings. He did his job, professionally. If the roles are reversed and it was an IRIN sub that saw a USN warship, he would have done the same. Thats the 'principled' position. We can and may discuss moral and principled positions separately. Intertwining both would confuse all. It is a war. War is brutal. War at sea is far more. Ban war and all such incidents would be avoided.