is the difference between reasonable and unreasonable. This is why I'll defend eliminating an immediate potential threat
without hesitation. There is a line between brutally murdering an unarmed prisoner and reacting to a threat; these two incidents fall clearly on opposite sides of that line. The soldier taking advantage of the situation to be (at the very least) criminally reckless has been punished, albeit with a bit too much lenience for my taste; he should be made an example of, but admittedly it seems to be a quid pro quo for cooperation.
Terrible things happen in war. It might not be fair that the conduct of US troops is held to a standard somewhere between the perfect and the superhuman - unlike that of other nations
(seen any protesters waving a "France out of Ivory Coast" sign lately?) - but that's the way it is. Despite that improbably high standard, though, the American military is largely able to live up to it, and appropriately punishing inappropriate behaviour in exactly
this manner is the proof.