[jumpy]

Without looking too closely at the particulars of this case I think this illustrates quite clearly some of the poblems facing a modern military force. Like the case recently of british troops beating the s***t out of some young iraqis and being cought doing it on film - Troops are trained to kill, that is their purpose. Get the job done preferably using the most expedient means. Much of that training relies on speed and aggression to control a situation or overcome an objective.
Some small wonder that troops who are trained in such a way have difficulties when they have a 'police force' role imposed upon them. A soldiers natrual, encouraged reaction to a threat is to meet that threat with all the force available at his disposal. Generally this doesn't include giving whatever bad guys who might be around a second chance.
Sure military personnel are also trained to perform other duties, but the primary function of the infantry soldier is to kill. It's got to be pretty frustrating to have to not respond in the way you have been trained to do when coming under attack or when encountering difficult circumstances, particularily when there are conflicting directives for engaging the 'enemy'.
I'm not condoning such apparently vicious behaviour, but really, what's the difference between troops on the ground killing 'innocent' people and laser guided munitions going astray and doing the same? At the end of the day you still end up with a bunch of dead people.
As has already been alluded to; war is a nasty business. But what we hear from Iraq these days (excluding the outrage over hostage killings) seems to pale in comparison to some of the things I've read about the fighting on the eastern front between Germany and the Soviets during WW2. Things might seem bad over there to us now, but I'd venture to say they're not even close to the awful brutality of Stalingrad etc.
With any luck those who need to will get to the bottom of this one and find out the truth of the matter and act appropriately.