ZH,
"If the enemy is a signatory of the Geneva Convention, then treat them under those rules, if they are not a signatory, then treat them iaw the 10 commandments - do unto others, before they do you."
Is this an example of do what you like and justify it later?
Both the US and the UK are signatories of the GC, end of story.
It does not matter if they happen to fight someone who is not. The US and UK must abide by the GC.
For those like 16B who claim that the GC acts like a straitjacket on the actions of US/UK forces, I would say, GOOD!!!
The actions that are outlawed by the GC are banned for good reasons.
Already the US is attempting to re-write the GC with the "enemy combatant" title and then claiming they can do what they like to them.
Careful reading of the GC shows that there is no category of prisoner or combatant that it is acceptable to treat in this manner.
To the incidents at hand I do feel that they are isolated incidents involving bad apples. They exist in all forces. It has been the truth since time began.
As to the culpability of officers as opposed to squaddies, I feel that if the officers knowingly fail to discipline said offenders fully then said officers should be dealt with as condoning the actions a la Sunfish's post.
Cheers
BHR