I agree entirely with the two replies above. There is an extensive body of law which regulates armed conflict and it is not, in it's application, somehow optional.
Those who break the law must be dealt with in a similar fashion to any other individual who breaks the law. Would it be acceptable for a person in a British city to kill another individual purely for the sake of savagery? Should it be any more acceptable outside of the bounds of conflict (in the strict sense) in Basra or Lashkar Gah for a British soldier to do the same?
While I accept the need for, and indeed admire, the public support given to British troops serving abroad, it should not be limitless. Those who commit crimes in war should be held to account and to the highest standards. Such crimes rubbish the efforts of their colleagues, the public who support them and whatever other noble sentiments they purport to represent.
The 'support our boys' mentality can not, nor should it, extend to a load of testosterone fueled, ill diciplined thugs beating another man to death.
As for banning the media from reporting - don't be daft. Is that really the sort of society you wish to live in and defend?
Last edited by legallooptheloop; 24th Nov 2009 at 19:44.