I have always been struck by the omnipresent levels of vitriol aimed at certain Republican figures who now stand in office (of sorts), judging by the levels and tone of response when anything to do with any of those chaps pops up the wounds are still fresh and very much open. A good deal of my lot had lost their lives on Herrick when a troop of us settled down for a banyan with a couple of local chiefs and a number of ex Taliban. It wasn't exactly a roller disco but i learned in those 2 hours what their hopes and dreams were, how they now viewed the West's involvement in Afghanistan and one showed pictures of his family, in particular a sister who at that point I would have back stroked through cat shit to sniff her undercarriage. Looking at them across the rug I didn't associate the individual with the act (the act of killing my colleagues), they in turn didn't seem too upset with us, one of said he remembers being afforded 5 minutes of ceasefire from the British when he went forward to pick up his mangled pal. Are you sure some of you older lot aren't being a bit dramatic? I mean, you weren't at it every day, you were up against a near partisan group with a few thousand AKs and some swear words. In fairness to McGuiness and Adams and co they have played an integral part in getting those loosely on the road to recovery and I think without their persistent effort and community influence life wouldn't be as good in the Counties as it is now. So am I understanding this wrong or are the scars too deep?