[IronJack]

It's okay to shoot an enemy in the belly.
It's okay to bayonet an enemy in the belly.
It's okay to snipe an enemy from a hidden spot.
It's okay to drop explosives on an enemy and blow him to pieces.
It's okay to set an enemy on fire and watch him burn to death.
It's okay to toss a grenade into an enemy's room and watch the shrapnel rip him apart.
It's okay to drop artillery, mortar, and missile rounds on an enemy.
It's okay to use nukes to radiate the enemy so his guts rot out.

But it's not okay to put a rag over his face and pour water on him, because THAT is "cruel" and "immoral?"

WAR is cruel and immoral. It's also a fact of life among fallen humanity.

There's no gentle way to defeat your enemy.

[rktman]

At one point, a JAG lawyer had to approve a lot of that stuff. Not sure what the current ROEs are.

[PapaBear3625]

It's okay to shoot an enemy in the belly.

If I was a platoon leader, and I knew a high-ranking terrorist was in a house, I might risk my men to capture him alive, if I thought we could get information from him.

If he has no information value, what is my incentive in risking my men to take him alive? Rather than just calling in an airstrike on the location?