So that means it's perfectly OK to grab civilians, kill them, and then plant evidence in an attempt to indicate that he was planting an IED?
I would tend to believe our boys before I accepted the word of the unreliable, faceless enemy.
They aren't being tried on the word of an unreliable, faceless enemy. They're being charged by the very same U.S. military.
There is a lot of killing in a war zone. If we trained our military to ask questions and then shoot (if you have permission and bullets), we would not last very long. There are probably not only a few instances where instinctive actions had undesireable consequences. I frankly do not believe that our soldiers believe that it is okay to grab civilians, kill them and then plant evidence. I do believe that we have Clintonista operatives in the military, or too many officers who believe in patent leather rather than Patton. Half of our congress want to cut and run; maybe some of our active military are worrying about their futures if the Democrats take over. So to CYA, especially with the Murtha's of the world in position to take over, we have a lack of intestional fortitude in connection with marginal action by our enlisted men.