Toadstool
Also agreed. Very well said. I was nearly with you.
However.
"Some people have described this as not a murder. Some people who really should know better given their background. They even harp on about the past where such atrocities were committed as if this is an excuse to do it now. I thought we learned about the past so not to commit further mistakes. It appears some still live in the past and refuse to learn. Thankfully, most if not all the people I have and continued to serve with in past and current conflicts do not have this kill at all costs and be damned the consequences. "
This quote shows the problem.
You know those old wars, where we used to commit atrocities?
We used to win them.
These new wars where we generally obey the rules and the other side doesn't?
Not so much.
They don't think we are moral. They think we are weak.
If you are not willing to "win at all cost and be damned the consequences" then you have absolutely no business sending men like the Marine into combat.
We have nuclear weapons yet send a man to jail for shooting a bad guy!!
Talk about sending mixed signals, when it is perfectly normalised that we may have to wipe out entire cities of innocent people but bad guys with a hurty tummy are off limits!?
My honest opinion is that the rules of war are there to make the public feel happy and actually prolong war and suffering for everybody.
Some of the "greats" from the history of bad guys such as Genghis Khan had amazingly peaceful conquests and reigns due to the fact that after a couple of atrocities, nobody was willing to fight anymore.