Ok. You are really squirming here.
There you go again.
Let's make it simple.
The US 82nd and 101st fought Waffen-SS units in the ETO. The unofficial unit policy was to kill all Waffen-SS combatants either during "combat", even after any Waffen-SS soldiers were captured and briefly held prisoner for interrogation. During the time the Waffen-SS prisoners were being interrogated for battlefield intel - they were disarmed. In fact, they were considered disarmed POWs according to the Geneva Conventions after their surrender. They were still killed by US forces. It happened...
Now back to the original question. How does that action during WWII square with your flexible morality vice what might have happened to civilians at Haditha?
You might be interested to note that our quite moralistic Canadian cousins to the north had a similiar "no-prisoner" policy in effect during WWII with the Waffen-SS - especially after they tangled with the 12SS Panzer "Hitlerjugend" (Hitler Youth) in Normandy.
dvwjr
Now back to the original question. How does that action during WWII square with (ad hominem deleted) what might have happened to civilians at Haditha?
It doesn't.
Combatants are one class.
Civilians are another.
One chooses (or is forced by some despotic regimes) to take up arms in war. Being disarmed does not alter that choice.
The 24 women and children mentioned here did not make that choice, which means they do not deserve the same treatment.