In no way should Jeep warranty it. Why? B/c Jeep would have no way of knowing how the driver was driving it when the break occurred. Was he WOT at 6K, bouncing off the rev limiter while trying to climb a pair of 4' boulders?
Honestly, I know Americans have a real problem with taking responsibility for their actions, but this seems extreme. Rockcrawling puts tons of invisible stresses in metal fatigue on all sorts of components....even if one is very careful and crawls most obstacles...the torque multiplication alone of a 4:1 tcase gear can overtax normal gear steel alloys (like 8620 for example) much faster than conventional gearing. Everything is a tradeoff. NOTHING will last forever. Even if Jeep started putting D60 front axles with 300m shafts...people would still break them.
What I've noticed about "no questions asked, lifetime" warranties is that they really bring out the stupid in people. If you look at most every major brand making that claim in the axle world (from Marfields, to Longs, to Alloy USA, CTM, etc.) even in 300M, they've had to go back on that warranty. People do dumb stuff and then want the company to fit the bill. That's not reasonable or realistic (not to mention ethical).
I actually agree with everything you said 100%, especially about warranties bring in the stupid/picky people.
I was just curious about how Jeep justifies advertising and promoting a Rubicon for off-road use and reliability and then doesn't warranty it when people use their "rough and tough" vehicle the way they specifically promote it. I agree there's a lot of variables to account for (including human stupidity), but it was the more "False Advertising" that the whiny crowd would inevitably throw around that made me curious about the situation.
Trying to differentiate offroading from "rockcrawling" is difficult though.....truth is, most "trail riding" is going to have a rockcrawling element involved.
Say you want to do Holy Cross in CO., or Dusy Ershim in CA.....both would be considered "offroading", but they are also LONG established "trail runs"....that have quite a bit of "rockcrawling" on the trails themselves.
The same can be said for trails throughout the US. Most of the more well known trails (known for being rated moderate to difficult) will generally have at least a few sections that are going to require "rockcrawling" of some sort.
It's not as black and white as your'e trying to characterize it.
That's entirely true which is why I look at "off-roading" as a broad spectrum of various "niche activities" and "broad stroke activities;" because as you pointed out on even a simple overlanding excursion you may need to do rock-crawling and "baja-esque" style driving over various terrain.
Though I've noticed that in the US, many people consider the ultimate 4x4 to be a dedicated "Rock Crawler." By that I mean a vehicle that's expected to purposefully seek out 2' or taller boulders to conquer because they can. Where as in Europe they literally have "Euro-Truck" (which I loved as a kid) where they take essentially modified 2~4 axle utility trucks and overland and trailblaze with them (which does involve crawling rocks sometimes). The focus if more on actually getting through rough terrain and making a trail/path than showing off to people that you can crawl a rock.
So yes I agree, it's a very arbitrary/semantic difference that is necessitated because of differences in culture as to how "off-roading" as an activity is seen in various places. I make that difference because people often tell me "but can your 4Runner crawl big ass boulders?" and I look at them and go, "no, but it can blaze a trail on the road and off the road and drive like a dream doing it compared to your 'ultimate' 4x4." No offense to people who rock crawl, it's a cool sport and those machines are impressive, but they for the most part are less than ideal for anything besides their purpose built activity.
Because most people on this forum are a bunch of posers that roll with lifts and heavy tire to look cool even though the majority of their driving is on pavement. I have 4WD, a rear locker, and H/T tires, yet a still haven't really used the vehicle to the fullest potential in this form. Plus adding a lift and heavy, aggressive tires just makes it drive like a piece of crap on the road.
Also, European often do modify their trucks(usually LR Defenders and Nissan Patrols), but when they do, the majority of them definitely use it to the fullest. Unlike the states they don't have bros in Pentastar powered Rubicons and Super Dutys running around like morons with LED light bars and winches that never get used.
That's entirely true, I often get asked when I'm going to throw a roof rack, winch, and light bars on my 4Runner. A lot of people for the longest time looked at my 4Runner and wondered what I really did to it (before I got the 35's), which I explained to them was the intent.
I spent more time and research on getting a well-valved suspension for my vehicle (2.5" diameter front & rear Overland Warehouse lift kit), RCI Sliders (went with bolt-on due to their design being as good as welded but reversible), RCI Skidplates, Shrockworks Bumpers, ect. Because I wanted to improve the handling and performance of the vehicle off-road and on-road rather than that "off-road look. I spent a lot of time trying to make things look stock/factory when I modded because I wanted things to "flow" well and the mods I did for the most part were function first, form later (i.e. the SW bumper is because of approach angle and wanting protection/reinforcement up front, same with the slider and skid plates; but the suspension was chosen to compliment those upgrades and retain good suspension quality as well). I want a winch, light bars, roof rack, ect. but so far I have very rarely found myself needing a winch, extra lighting, or even a roof rack (I haven't used the factory one yet); so my focus on things that I will utilize (i.e. a spare tire carrier with maybe some extra spots for Jerry Cans, if not a full metal rear bumper, on-board air system, better rear suspension components, ect.).
You're right though, a lot of people build their rigs for "looks" and think about performance later. I only started really building my vehicle after I first off-roaded it, because I got a feel for how I would use it and how it would be used; thus had a design goal for creating a more robust, all-around off-road vehicle.
I would urge most people to actually off-road their rigs at least once to really get an idea of what they want/need before they start modifying their vehicles. As you mentioned in other placed those vehicles usually are modified (in some cases very heavily) but it's often all stuff you don't see until you look closely. Because that culture is less about showing off your "ultimate 4x4" and more about modifying it to BE the ultimate 4x4.
The point: even with a fancy snorkel (sans real electrical waterproofing in most cases), you won't see most American owners ford a creek/river to the depth that the interior is going to fill with water, let alone break trail in a jungle environment where they're going to destroy the factory paint job. 
