I never said the soldiers should not be punished. I said that if the charges are true, we should judge them in the light of the very severe psychological trauma and scarring that we know that unrelenting warfare and the PTSD that results from it cause. As a matter of fact, Private Green had just been discharged on psychological grounds. A well-known example of this phenomenon, historically, is the My Lai massacre in Vietnam. I don't think anybody would argue that the perpetrators of the My Lai incident were predisposed, by their nature, to go about killing in normal circumstances, and I don't think any one of us can state for a fact that we could never undergo a severe psychosis were we subjected daily to friends and family members being blown to pieces and facing a certain, violent death ourselves at every single turn--in fact, very, very few soldiers return from any war "normal". That was my assertion from the beginning, and to the present.
What kind of punishment would be warranted for these soldiers? I don't know--perhaps a long-term institutional commitment until it could be demonstrated that their mental health had progressed to a state where they were compatible with civilian society?
As for your commentary, while I must profess ignorance of halachic rulings in this area, I do not believe Torah ever prescribes capital punishment for the killing of Amalek. But, if I am wrong (and I might be), show me and I will agree with your point. I continue to believe that jihadists and all who support them, to any extent, do deserve the death penalty, albeit it should be carried out by military courts rather than mentally-compromised soldiers, of course.
I am bowing out of this thread. Feel free to lock it, and accept my apology for causing this controversy.