This is no My Lai. There's no question that Calley's platoon took ZERO hostile fire from My Lai, or that they subsequently contravened the ROE, by shooting obvious non-combatants clearly visible, in the open. That's very different from clearing the inside of a darkened house, at night. In this instance, the Marines involved took hostile fire from those houses. The question here, is what the precise ROE were. I do know this; under the ROE we had in Vietnam, I could, upon receiving hostile fire from a group of hooches, order my men to "Light 'em up!", and I did, more than once. If there was automatic weapons fire coming from a hooch, I had ZERO obligation to look inside before tossing in a grenade. If there was anyone in there who was not a VC, I guess it was not his/her lucky day-tough! It was legal, it was in compliance with standing orders and the ROE, and I make no apologies for it. I dson't really care what anyone's uninformed opinion is in the matter-you weren't there!
In my opinion the incident is very similar to my lai. In haditha, like my lai, US service members took action against non-combatants that were supporting or atleast
sympathetic to guerillas operating in the area after taking casualties from indirect enemy action ie ieds or booby traps.