world, that is a politically-correct fallacy in many, many ways.
There are important distinctions to make, especially within the context of the Second World War, in this regard. The Germans and Japanese, infected with a brand of fascism which was heavily impregnated by racial bigotry and antiquated notions of national greatness. But the Allied side also had it's share of questionable cultural traits, prime amongst them the idea that Empires created by force should last forever see DeGaulle, Halifax, Stalin, et. al.).
Whoops, let me finish the thought (posted too soon)!
The point I'm trying to make is that the (mental and intellectual) validity of one's culture is directly proportionate to the extent to which one's mind and heart are dedicated to his cause.
So, while a Japanese of the Second World War would see nothing wrong with executing prisoners under the cultural influence Bushido code, a Westerner would have no problem justifing the same action in the light of the Malmedy massacre. Your justification always depends on your point of view to the exclusion of all others.
I'd say neither response (in the example above) is moral, or culturally superior. They are just differents sides of human nature, which can usually be depended upon to be wholly disgusting.
The simple fact is they were mean little bast*rds with a high sense of invulnerability and it required extreme measures to bring them back to earth. Like everyone else, I don't approve of making war on women and children but .....