Take the case of the militiaman supposedly portrayed by Robert Capa when he's hit by enemy fire. If the situation is portrayed (re-created) then I understand the claim of dishonesty.
But in a posed portrait - as this is the case - I don't understand where is the re-creation. Re-creation of what, I mean?
The picture belongs to a reportage distributed by Magnum, a "portfolio" of images about a certain subject, with some background information. You see this kind of set situations (portraying real situations, but set at the moment of portraying) in any documentary.
Do you think the eagle really captures the rabbit naturally and the camera happens to be there? The rabbit is probably tied to a rope, it is freed when the eagle is hunting for prey, the scene is taken with favourable light, if the rabbit runs in the wrong direction the action is repeated. But this is not even that case.
This is the case where you go to a certain place in Albania and in order to illustrate that there is a lot of criminality and people have weapons you ask an Albanian to make a portrait with his Kalashnikov for you.
I'm sure you have seen many portraits of this kind. It's all very normal in the industry.