I don't necessarily agree with that assessment.

The whole Geneva Convention thing on non-expanding bullets is a bit pointless and of no real utility, in my opinion. War is supposed to be about maximum damage, and in a world where we no nuke entire cities, who really gives a flying f**k about whether you shoot someone with a hollow-point or not? If I am engaged in combat and have access to deadlier tools, I WILL USE THEM. I do not fault the Marines. Especially when they are doing this because they are being forced to field a new weapon with a reduced length barrel that bleeds off velocity from standard ammo (reducing effectiveness) and which requires this sort of new projectile to compensate for that degredation of performance.  

However, the Navy JAG's Office, who, like typical lawyers, have been able to weasel and abuse the language enough to claim that this is somehow not what it is, and justify this change as though it were not against the "rules":...THAT is dishonerable.

>> Marines begin to abandon Geneva Accords;...

And in doing so also abandon what honor they have left.