I watched the video. I read the transcripts.
The initial attack on the armed enemy combatants was justifiable considering the circumstances. The Apache crew didn't know about the embedded journalists, and in any case those journalists were accompanying enemy soldiers in a hot zone. Wrong place, wrong time, war sucks.
But the subsequent post-firefight attack on unknown samaritans?
That was simply obscene. That was "man's inhumanity to man" - in other words, a war crime (both by the Apache crew and their base controller for authorising their request to fire). Or are you advocating that the next time _American_ combatants are injured and/or dying, that the enemy _should_ fire upon people trying to aid them post-firefight?
This is the sort of "we can't do wrong, we're the good guys" and "it's only evil when the enemy does it" denial that eventually leads to places like Auschwitz.
And then there's your comment, "but if you lack the constitution you may want to avoid watching real combat action videos as they can be disturbing and possibly personally distressing"?
You used the wrong word. It's not "constitution". It's "empathy". And if you lack any empathy with those of your own species being injured, maimed or killed, we have two other words that define that: "conditioned" or "sociopath".