Teribus, the reason I advocate public humiliation (not collective punishment, as you state, at least not the same punishment collectively, but according to each one's involvement in the crime), is that a criminal is rarely "created in a vacuum". He/she has been brought up with certain beliefs on the way, his/her behaviour has likely been ignored/excused by those close to them, and so on.

When someone commits a crime in civilian life, they are named, their photos may appear in papers etc, and their families automatically shamed for their involvement (or failure to be involved in some cases) in the life of the criminal up to that point. I am simply saying "do the same in the case of war criminals". Name and shame. No different from civilian life. We did that at the Nuremberg trials, after all, the precedent is there.

Oh, I know, I could stack up a number of excuses why treatment of the military should be different. They would count for little in my book.

And yes, if my son or daughter steals, or injures somebody while drunk-driving, or kills, or commits a war crime, I expect to shoulder some of the blame. Because I will have failed as a parent. No way to hide or avoid that.

I could even make a case for "community responsibility", especially where gung-ho attitudes are encouraged and applauded. The shame there tends to be expressed as "we are not/ should not be proud of...". But it is there all the same.

The opposite of sharing responsibility in appropriate measure would be to create scapegoats.