One of the problems we've had is that we haven't really fought a true all out war since WWII, they've all been "police actions." A soldier at war has the duty to disable the enemy to the extent the enemy either expires or submits. Asking a soldier to play police officer is insane, the 2 jobs are not the same and merging the 2 only creates confusion and low moral. Requiring our soldiers to treat prisoners of war as if they had the same or greater rights than US citizens under our constitution is also absurd. But that is the PC of the day. But even if we accept our soldiers acting as police, under our system, there is still the rule of "such force is as necessary," and I can tell you that there are times when a police officer is required to assualt a handcuffed detainee. For instance, martial arts experts can kill, even with their hands cuffed behind their backs, and that requires a level of force that might seem repugnant at first light.
A Prisoner of war is not a criminal, he is an enemy combatant, just as our soldiers would be an enemy combantant to our enemy. Warfare, according to the Geneva Accords, has a set of rules, and making a person a criminal due to participation in a war is not one of them. True, somethings like the hallocost, can come out of war and are criminal in and of themselves, but that is an individual action of scope. The treatment of POW's is outlined in the Geneva Accords governing warfare, and in reading the articles posted in this thread, nowhere do I see a violation of the rules of war by the SEALS, which would be required for the action being taken to be applied. Hitting a POW, in order to control him, is not a violation, if the alleged hitting actually took place.
I've served under officer's who were a little over the top with their command authority but in the days of a larger, draftee, Armed Forces they were usually filtered out at the LTC or Col. level and didn't become General or Flag Officers, the experience was not pleasant and the entire unit had moral problems--top to bottom. That is no longer true in todays all volunteer forces where sub-standard officers are retained because of lack of volunteers, need I point out the debacle at Fort Hood to prove my point on that?.