Then why the label? Murder has a legal definition that is consistent throughout the Western world, so I don't buy that arguement as a legitment stance.
You obviousily missed the statement "Only one operation I know of during Iraq comes close to violating this committment that most soldiers in that I served with attempt to live up to. And even that was done by individual soldiers/officers and from what I have read and heard those individuals have been brought up for courts martial. "
However, if you read up on the tactics used in Falluja, you will see that the difference between mass murder and urban combat sometimes is.... very small indeed.
Now one would have to provide the exact event and the details around it. Somilia airstrikes were called on just such an event - and while not every one was armed - most had the intent to attack.
As an example, calling in airstrikes on a mob where maybe one out of 50 is carrying a weapon. Mass murder or valid combat doctrine?
Spoiler Alert, click show to read:
And again why the use of labeling combat soldiers as murderers. Are some guilty of that crime - sure, but your making a specific claim and generalizing them all into that catergory. And by your own arguement you seemly understand the difference. So are you being disengous (SP) or as some stated just plain anti-american. If it's something else then please state soHowever, that is about the US army, this thread is about mercs.
My reasoning is BASED on US troops acting more controlled than mercs, so no disagreement there.
Bookmarks