It would be good to get some specifics applied here rather than vague generalisations like "X were horrible". Scope, proportion of British / US involved, level of "horrible" activities seem like they would help avoid this becoming a stereotype. After all it wouldn't be acceptable to make stereotypes about Persians or others in a similar position.
Thanks. I agree on further consideration that stereotype isn't quite the right word. It seemed that vague terms like "horrible" were not likely to mean the same thing to different readers, in contrast to the way that more tangible accusations might stand up and be more universally understood.
