Your whole statement is incorrect. First, ROE changes based on the scenario. There's SROE for non-wartime operations and there's WROE during wartime. WROE allows for near limitless use of force on enemy combatants in response to an offense. ROE are typically guidelines determining military response to an action. In the video provided above (i.e., combatant claiming to have a weapon, concealing said weapon, using suggestive body language, etc) would fall easily under self-defense. Even if said person was civilian. This would also be "deterring an armed attack", and a "proportionate response to provocation". Unless you are educated in and understand the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC) don't spread misinformation.
Under the Standing Rules of Engagement (ROE), military forces are already authorized to use force in response to a hostile act or demonstrated hostile intent under their “inherent right to self-defense.”
Further reading here: https://www.trngcmd.marines.mil/Portals/207/Docs/TBS/B130936%20Law%20of%20War%20and%20Rules%20Of%20Engagement.pdf [1]
And here