[muawiyah]

I was unaware of any US policy to shoot the severely wounded on the field of battle. Ordinarily they are left there for whatever medical treatment can be provided.

Still, if this officer were taken before Judge Greer, he'd probably walk.

[OldEagle]

"Still, if this officer were taken before Judge Greer, he'd probably walk."

No, Judge Greer would convict him. Judge Greer probably has liberal anti-military bias.

[conservativecorner]

The only point that matters is that the man was mortally wounding (DYING), and the soldier did what would have been considered humane and the only decent and right thing to do in any war prior to the Vietnam debacle where the show was run by elected officials, namely Johnson and McNamara, who micromanaged our troops into a forced loss.

[ruiner]

True, and I wasn't trying to be facetious. At some point we (collectively) have to recognize that morals etc break down in these environments and there will be cases where things happen like this.

[MizSterious]

Obviously, his biggest mistake was not to put Felos on his defense team. Felos would have explained the joys of dying, although surely being shot is not quite as euphoric as starving and dehydration.

[Modernman]

I was unaware of any US policy to shoot the severely wounded on the field of battle. Ordinarily they are left there for whatever medical treatment can be provided.

At the end of the day, that is what this guy did wrong. We can debate whether, morally, he did the right thing. However, it is clear that American military policy does not allow for shooting severely wounded enemies if they pose no threat.

This guy is an officer. He should have known better.