Dragonlich

It was on an interview on BBC world. But that was once, never heard anything about it since. Hence my statement that it wasn't reported.

You seem to misunderstand my statement, and the training I was talking about. If you take it to the extreme you do, yes it's absurd. But in the real world, and with the real training, it's not.

Imagine the situation: a group of soldiers are told to clear a house. They go in, find what looks like dead people on the floor. They have to secure the room, and make sure there's not going to be any surprises. So they move closer to the bodies, weapons at the ready. One of the bodies moves a bit. They have to make a split-second decision; is he going for a weapon, or isn't he?

The proper military reaction supposedly is to shoot the moving person. Sounds harsh, but you have to remember that it's a hostile area, and the soldier's *own* safety comes first. They're trained not to take any chances.

Now, if that original "dead" guy were to have put up his arm, and offered to surrender, he would not have been shot. Case in point: in the reported incident, a second wounded Iraqi did that immediately after the first one was killed; he was taken prisoner.

If I recall correctly, the British soldier said that they would have shot the "dead" body. They'd then check the body for obvious booby traps, after which the soldier would have to lie on top of the body, to prevent any further movement. Finally, he would grab the body, and roll sideways, exposing anything that was underneath the body; and protecting the soldier a bit in case of an explosion.

I can only assume he was telling the truth, of course.