I think this notion that he was doing the “honorable” thing by “not allowing himself to be used for propaganda” might itself be outmoded machismo. We have the benefit of hindsight of course but does the decision hold up to critical thinking? Was avoiding a hit to morale worth his life?
Did any good come of his remaining? He lifted the spirits of a couple of other POWS, that’s all I can think of. Was that worth risking his life and his sanity?
He could have done more good if he was free, he could inform about the conditions in the prison, he could tell loved ones of fellow POWs that they were still alive and if recovered sufficiently he could have gotten back in a plane and killed some commies!
He ended up singing a “confession” under torture, a very foreseeable consequence of remaining, was that less a propaganda coup for the commies than his release would have been?
It seems to me that he suffered permanent physical (and mental) injury for nothing. Tragic, but heroic?
I don’t see why they didn’t drag him out and dump him in South Vietnam, you hardly need a prisoners’ consent to do that. Would he have have walked back over the border to be recaptured? They could always claim he consented to the release and plenty would have believed it even over his objections.
John McCain: What could have been. But instead, what was. RIP. Now go away, your family too.
Everything else, including Kennedys/pedos/mass shooters/Leftists in general/etc.: Do I have to say it again? You know my one word answer.