[expat_panama]

The conflict in Iraq is different from past conflicts-- obviously, the nature of conflict has been evolving since the hoplites organized the phalanx.   A really big difference in Iraq is the introduction of combat legal specialists.  Please stop laughing--

True story:  during the air attack at the beginning of the invasion, the command center for picking targets for air attacks had-- along with the usual bunch of tacticians and other specialists for accessing risks versus gain per target--  a bunch of lawyers so they could also gather expert legal advice as to say, what the tort liability would be for annihilating this guy as opposed to exploding that guy. (re "The Iraq War: A Military History" Williamson Murray and Robert H. Scales Jr).

Roman legions didn't have combat medics, chaplains, press core-- these are all recent additions.  Now we have combat legal staff saying "Shoot the guy wearing the red sock-- oh $h!t, I meant the other guy with a red sock!"

[Gunrunner2]

The lawyers are supposed to evaluate the proportional military gain against the potential civilian cost. The planning cell of the AOC has many lawyers and in any Tier IV area this is critical. To assist in this judgment call are technology (CDET for example), intel, ops, weaponeering, etc. The lawyers are then supposed to provide the JFACC with their assessment if the proportional military gain is worth the probable civilian cost.

That said, too many clintoon-era lawyers are still around and acting spineless.