Ethically mature decision making
Great post! In mature normative ethics, the actors on either side of an action don't make a difference. If we believe it is wrong for actor A to commit action X against actor B, then it doesn't become right is we swap the actors. Of course, this is a big problem when you're really powerful and want to do whatever the hell you want without regard to others.
I also believe in practical application ...
INTJ - does the theory work in practice ?
The "facts" presented in this thread are totally inadequate for any sort of reasoned discussion - chaff.
Cross-border incidents are very fact intensive - and the facts have to determined. That determination most likely will require analysis of two or more competing set of facts.
Coincidentally, I just linked several decent resources that address those issues in this post, Kill or Capture - the McNeal View.
This particular cross-border incident most probably was not a pre-planned operation; but rather one where troops were in an emergency situation requiring close air support (CAS) or close combat attack (CCA). In both CAS and CCA in Afghanistan, the pilot may not deploy a weapon without ground commander direction, usually through a JTAC. Same idea for arty. But, I'll wait for the "fourth" after action report, which is more likely to have the facts right.
Nuff said by me here.
Regards
Mike