In 2001, the (UK) Defence Scientific Advisory Council (DSAC), who report to the Secy of State, said in a draft report, discussing what the Infantry would look like in 2020:
'Rules of Engagement will change according to the circumstances and will reflect societal and legal requirements for minimum casualties to own forces, the enemy and the 'innocent civilian', as well as minimising collateral damage to property. All this will place the soldier under increasing pressure and constrain his freedom of action. The licentious soldiery whose prerogative is to rape and pillage has no place in the Army of today'.
To which Director Infantry-elect replied, 'When was the prerogative removed?' His point being it shouldn't remain in the final version. It did. We never did work out why they would mention such a thing, and there was polarised opinion. Some senior officers thought it tacit acknowledgement, and indeed elsewhere in the report DSAC referred to a certain leeway being granted to 'bonny fighters' who are more likely to break rules when not closely supervised.
A difficult subject, but the DSAC made it clear that pinning it solely on the young infantryman was not the way. (Which makes it an appropriate subject for a military aviation forum).