Even though the rules are obviously easily ignored -
Yes.
In my most recent game, I laid out the basic campaign types you could have: police & crime, counter/insurgency, conventional war, anarchy, terrorism, and wrote,
"Many people will baulk at playing terrorists or criminals, but this is entirely up to the game group."The implication there is that you should consider the rest of your game group when preparing to run a game, or planning your character's actions. But if all of you are good with it, enjoy.
I also said,
Nationality, ethnicity & gender: the referee may set the nationality of all the adventurers, but the player should choose their adventurer's ethnicity, gender and other personal characteristics. These will have no game mechanical effect, but naturally may become relevant in play. Then at the back of the book there's a bit about being captured, a mention of torture, and reputation. The implication there is that the PCs can run around tearing people's toes off with pliers and shooting bound civilians in the back of the head if they want - but there may be
in-game consequences. It's not the GM's job to judge the players morally, but just to present them with reasonable consequences for what their characters do, reasonable given the setting.
I think it's best for a game designer to lay things out impartially, more or less, to say: this is what the game is designed and works best for, but hey do what you like.