No serious or significant religion makes that judgment, nor does any serious orthodox believer hold that belief. The only religious justifications for mass killing would be if the targets in question had so greviously offended God that they had it coming, in which case, He is probably not going to exert Himself to save them, or else they are endangering the faith or something by their actions. The commonly heard sayings "Kill 'em all & let God sort them out" or "God will know His own" originated as exhortations in military (i.e. justifiable-killing) situations, intended to overcome the religiously-inspired squeamishness of their subordinates towards killing. You just sound like a horse's ass and reveal your own prejudices when you attribute such inept reasoning to religious believers.

Who cares, one way or another? Even if they ARE destroyed for all time (I don't believe that, but don't care about that anyway), it makes no difference. The state or fate of one's soul is strictly a private matter, and irrelevant to the justification of their homicide.

Good point. But just because they are idiots does not make them wrong about Rand being justified.

Thousands of people in uniform, with weapons, under agreement to unquestioningly follow the orders of their rulers who have demonstrated zero good faith, and about whom a strong cause can be made for their presumed hostility. SOLDIERS ARE LEGITIMATE TARGETS. Period. This was not a trade delegation, or convention of merchants, it was an army. They refused to explain their ends to a person they believed to have some connection with Rand, and their words regarding their intentions were all indicative of their displeasure at him. They are not his people, and he owes them nothing. Their demand that he put himself entirely in their power, even as they cozy up to a city that has behaved in an extremely hostile manner towards him in the past, whose current government replaced their former leader for her decision to release him from captivity. Rand had NO reason to think them friendly or benevolent, and they were an ARMY in threatening distance of his own followers and forces. Any other way of dealing with them would have entailed greater risks to people he IS responsible for. He was justified in what he planned to do to the Borderlanders AND to the Seanchan. If they don't like it, they shouldn't have come. The "innocent" civilians have had plenty of time to move away (as for example, the Anan family did, in their moral outrage over the Seanchan institutions), but have chosen the Seanchan. They are all culpable.

And you moralizers lose your credibility by denying that other people have a valid right to protect their own existence. In other words, no one's right to exist takes precedence over your own. You have the right to kill anyone who endangers your existance, as does Rand.