You stand by it, and it is rot. Tyrannies in which life is cheap generally produce not better soldiers, but men ruled by fear, cronism and selection for loyalty rather than merit among leaders, lack of initiative, lack of technical means from stunted innovation, to the letter obedience to non-sensical orders issued by out of touch REMFs, useless waste of military material, and tactics as good as the enemy could wish for.
Ruthlessness is not a source of strength, it is a source of weakness. The contrary belief is a piece of rank superstition that is belied by all the evidence of history. The illusion arises from men doing violence to their own conscience and thinking it affects the enemy. It doesn't, but sometimes it prevents cooperation, and generally it dramatically reduces motivation as well.
Justice is the standing policy of the most successful states in history because it simply generates vastly more power through elicited support than tyranny ever can. The parts of the world that believe ruthlessness is the secret of power, to the point where men are willing to eat each other to scare their enemies, are hopelessly backwaters of impotent chaos.
Pretty speech look up the link I showed you, and read up on the other book.
If I am wrong about the outcome from the Second World war why did British and American Military staff colleges feel it is was a problem and look into ways to make Western Man more aggressive and more ready to kill.