Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer. If you decide to continue your subscription, you’ll get a 50% discount bit.ly/SimpleHistoryCore
how can it be a crime if there no police to enforce it ( the league of nation failed seem like nato is soon )plus if you win it doesn t apply to you ( exemple bombing civilian target during ww2 ) feel to me like the pirate code (the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules BARBOSSA
Remember everyone, it’s only a war crime if your side lost the war, if the winning side commits war crimes, it means that they “did what they had to do to win”
To some degree, it has to be like that. When an invader employs war crimes against defender, the defender feel required to fight on the most even ground they can. If invader employs war crimes in their strategy, the defender is at an unfair advantage if they continue to follow the rules.
That's where Constitution that needs to be followed both by government and people steps in. Depending on what's used in Constitution. It serves both as a means to preserve safety of civilians and/or government.
@@yeboxxx_channel_2505 Yes, this piece of paper will save us because the other piece of paper won't. The Constitution, like any other set of rules, only matters if people are willing to follow it. If they aren't, it's useless.
@@SlurpeeBoy9999 ok you are right but at this point since it's true that barely anyone follows it. Do we all just admit Demoracy is a joke if not forced by people? I guess.
Not quite. There are certain limitations. "Grave Breaches." See Article 147 of the Geneva Convention relative to civilians. Mandates have consequences.
Governments can’t last without the support of its people. While it would be hard to rise up against a powerful totalitarian government, human will always prevails… whether in one generation or more, we are capable of toppling them.
The “rules of war” mostly exist on paper. On a battlefield where people are doing everything they can to kill each other, it becomes more like suggestions for most and it really boils down to an individual soldier’s sense of morality.
Fun fact: There is no nation on Earth that is known to have followed the rules of war they agreed to, but very few nations have ever been held accountable for war crimes.
Brilliance- abhorrent actions are generally not recognised as an action of organisation. Abhorrent practices amount to war crimes by virtue of administration. There are all kinds of 'rules' that delineate 'civility' in industrialized society. It's like if we're playing tag and you get pegged in the genitals by a player trying to escape. If it happens once, it's something the other players might tell you not to do again, they might even laugh about it. If everyone's realising it works then it's "out of the realm of playing tag" in terms of realistic expectations. Humans are usually indoctrinated and act like that indoctrination is advancement of or upon a feral state.
how can it be a crime if there no police to enforce it ( the league of nation failed seem like nato is soon )plus if you win it doesn t apply to you ( exemple bombing civilian target during ww2 ) feel to me like the pirate code (the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules BARBOSSA
@@jessicalacasse6205There is a police to enforce it… just as soon as they get to you. Also everyone bombed Civil targets in WW2 mostly to destroy enemy factories and military installations. Also they thought that bombing Civilians would make them less inclined to keep fighting, but that’s not how that works.
There is a hollow point 5.56 round. For those who are not aware the hollow point ammunitions do not pierce level 3 body plates or steel sheets used for indoor ranges. They are used in indoor ranges.
Watching these comments makes me realize how many people are completely blind to the times the rules of war are followed. We will notice one bomb on a hospital, but not the hundred hospitals who did not get bombed
@@JourneywithSmee where? At a Neurenberg style tribunal? Hamas will not be held accountable there either Syria and Hezbollah will not be held accountable there either Iran and their ultimate peace philosophy will not be held accountable either Thank you for mentioning only Israël
Fun fact: The United States is not a party to The Hague Conventions, which is why the International Criminal Court cannot prosecute war criminals based in the U.S.A.; the United States legislature even passed legislation that would result in a U.S. declaration of war on The Netherlands were any such charges brought forth.
I’ll be honest one my three deployments first two as a medic, I found that enemies will freely fire on medical personnel. They did in El Salvador when was a peace keeper, and in Desert Storm. My M-113A3 ambulance got shot at multiple times. Then in the next Iraq war they bomb the crap out of our CRESH. They also blasted our ambulances and medevacs.
@@TomFromUA-cam hard to do that when all they give you is a stupid little M-9. Pistol. They won’t let a medical track have a M-2 .50 cal as it an offensive weapon.
Tell that to the German civilians burned alive at Dresden, German women and girls raped by Soviets in Berlin in 1945, the South Vietnamese civilians murdered by NVA forces ("But muh American war crimes muh Agent Orange reee!"), and the towns/cities burned by Union forces during the American Civil War.
@@andyfriederichsen None of those people were punished for their behavior. That's the point: if you win, you get away with it. Does that justify their actions? No, but that is also irrelevant.
7:44 I like that top secret technology that is used on that bolt action rifle with the bayonet on it. It cycles the bolt by itself, without the need for an operator. Amazing!
They still do. If you look at royalty around the world, they typically have or are serving in the armed forces. When WW2 broke out, the (UK) King at the time wanted to go to the front lines along with then-Prime-Minister Churchill. They say they had to restrain them from grabbing a weapon and running right into the action.
The naval Articles of War were originally issued by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty in 1653 as fighting instructions after defeat at the Battle of Dungeness. Soon after the Restoration, they were converted into an Act of Parliament.
The problem with the laws of war is how easy it is to circumvent them. I remember footage of a journalist and his camera man as well as some people that tried to stop and help him because the gunner claimed the camera was a rocketlauncher.
I remember seeing that footage. That was the infamous “collateral murder” video that was leaked by Wikileaks. Apparently the gunner had no idea those guys were journalists and civilians and were basically on their side. He opened fire on all of them. Crazy stuff.
definitely just suggestions that shall be ignored no one is gonna brag about rules in a real firefight it only makes you a easier target on a battlefield
@@wyattpeterson6286because Canadians in both world wars were some the best fighters in modern history, so it’s possible they committed war crimes like killing pows that surrendered
@@wyattpeterson6286 Quite a few things in the World Wars, but most of them came from the First War. One main thing the Canadian Army was known for was their exceptional low number of POWs captured. Canada was essentially the British Empire's shock troops when it came to trench warfare and especially at raiding trenches. They were known to take very few if any prisoners during the raids and quite a few instances of mutilating the bodies of the dead Germans. There were also several instances of them executing German soldiers after the soldiers surrendered to them. Another instance was around Christmas the Canadians threw cans of tin meat to the German trenches for a few days and after the Germans got use to it and didn't duck for cover they threw grenades at them instead. While around the same time in some other German/Canadian trenches the Germans tried to get another Christmas Truce between the two sides. After exchanging Christmas songs the Germans stood up out of the trenches and the Canadians shot them all down. There's a lot more different instances of Canadian war crimes but the main ones are of their treatment of captured, or lack of captured, German POWs.
I would also like to point out that after these rules were established, they have been abused and used as methods of shielding by our enemies. Such as not wearing uniforms to appear as a civilain... or using civilian structures and densely populated areas as strongholds. Rarely are these codes of conduct extended to us by our enemies.
@@emberfist8347 yeah basically the rules are writen in a way to basically cover the fact that there are those who will try and use the rules of war against one side or another for propaganda reasons. in such case of this happening then it's fair game for the other side to prosecute any of those enemies taken alive for those crimes.
I know and I would wager that those who wrote the rules did cover that angle of non state actors trying to weaponize the rules of war against people to allow crimes to happen and bate people in to a propaganda trap. the signers of such must have to take that in to account and should have fail safes in place to punish those who play that tactic.
Normally Medics and Corpsmen carried M1 Carbines or 1911s as back up guns. This was due to the fact in the Pacific theatre Japanese soldiers often disregarded the rules of engagement in combat
and used the red cross as a meat shield to move troops against china and viewed medics as easy kills etc. aka turn the rules of war against your enemies to weaken them by morals etc.
that is the weirdest one you cant killing people is fine, but leaving them alive but with a lasting injury isnt? I think most people would rather be alive and disabled than just dead
There is a photograph somewhere of an exchange of fire between a plane and someone in a parachute. The plane started firing at enemy pilots who bailed out after losing a dogfight. One of these pilots hanging from a parachute pulled out his pistol and killed the threat
As far as I know, there's only one recorded case fitting that description. I don't recall all the details, but I believe the paratrooper was a British airman in one of the World Wars (WWI, I think).
Now I gotta replay that Game and Ponder why we have to only use ballistic weaponry all because someone made a No cheating in War Rule named after the Capital of Switzerland and a location in the Netherlands.
Miles O'Brien : There are rules, even in a war. Garak : Correction Chief, humans have rules in war. Rules that tend to make victory a little harder to achieve, in my opinion.
Certainly one of the more Informative and Educational videos you have done. I have always wondered about the "Rules of War". Most people know all about the FIRST category, but the rest i bet almost no one knows less you have been in the military. Most of this stuff sounds like it would be considered "inhuman" or "unthinkable" by most people. So thanks for informing us.
These rules primarily serve two purposes: For winning nations to further punish and thus neuter those they defeat For strong nations to eliminate the only real recourse lesser nations have, so that they either have to fight with hand tied behind their back or provide excuse for escalation of force.
Just for anyone who is curious of the parachuting person, do not confuse the protections granted to aircrews/pilots to be the same for paratroopers. If a pilot or airplane crew are shot down over enemy lines and they are parachuting down, they would technically be protected since their aircraft serves in place of what would be a soldiers "Rifle" Once the aircraft is shot down, the pilots lost their ability to threaten enemy fortifications or incoming enemy planes. (Unless of course they use their service weapons to shoot at ground targets as mentioned in the video, then they would ultimately revoke their protections.) However, paratroopers do not qualify for this protection since they are being dropped down with full kit and gear with the intent of being on a mission to cause damage to the enemy.
14:10 doesn't matter then if a nuclear weapon is used tactical, strategical, or conventional. Because at that point war crimes don't matter, because we have bigger issues to worry about.
But what about those volksturm units are they still classified as a non combatants when they surrender or will they be thrown in the slammer and put on trial like the others
Sadly, because of why wars tend to be fought nowadays, only one side at the most is going to even try to respect the rules of war. And modern history has shown that the best players only used the rules of war as a suggestion half the time.
Nobody cares, everyone does it. War is nasty by virtue, I’m European and I can tell you, id still much rather have America be the world power than Russia or China. They ALL committed heinous war crimes, you just gotta chose the least evil, you‘ll never be able to eliminate the brutality or control what the people in power do and its beyond delusional to think otherwise. Instead of writing a UA-cam comment that does exactly NOTHING, donate some money or go volunteer in NGO‘s
The last survivor always tells the truth. What I mean by this is that is there is no evidence then it does not matter what you've done. History and actions are easily hidden and it's safe to assume every country has committed war crimes in the past few decades and gotten away with it
"According to the Hague and Geneva Conventions, Nations are not allowed to attack civilian Infrastructures, public services, historical cultural monuments, religious buildings, and agricultural sectors." Germany and Japan in WW2: 💀💀💀😈😈😈 Serbia in 1989 to 2005: 💀💀💀😈😈😈 Russia from 2022 up to this day: 💀💀💀😈😈😈
Well Germany had no legs to stand on. Gas attacks for one thing and bombing London. There was and still is no rule against using shotguns. But the Germans saw it as turning war into hunting and therefore barbaric.
I find it curious that something non-lethal and with no lasting effects like tear gas is banned. The only reason I can see is to prevent the party it is being used against jumping to the conclusion it is a lethal gas attack and responding with an illegal act (such as actual poison gas or nerve agent).
Actually tear/CS gas is classified as a incapacitating agent, thus the use of the chemical could be used to incapacitate combatants so they are easier to terminate.
That seems to make sense. But it's still stupid. Because if the gas I hit you with only irritated your eyes and respiratory system why would you think I used chlorine or mustard gas?
An old man came to me to make his last will. He proudly showed me a pocket watch he stole at gunpoint from a German POW in Europe during WWII. He instructed me to leave the watch to one of his children. Apparently it's a war crime to steal personal property from a captured combatant.
@@skullcrusher9445And that is part of why gas is banned but not nukes. You can control a nuke much better and prevent it from doing collateral damage to your own side or civilians compared to a chemical weapon.
So does Ukraine with every drone bomb they dropped since start of war . so did USA in Iraq and Afghanistan against civilian targets. so does Israhell on daily basis against civilian population, not to mention regular use of chemical weapons by Israhell. So does Saudis in their illegal war against Yemen. Your point being?
The thing about wars is that they are rarely 'to the bitter end'. Wars are often to serve a political purpose, and the fighting only goes as long as that purpose is fulfilled. Rules of war are to prevent wars from turning into fights of attrition and annihilation, aka to prevent wars from going too far past what they're meant for.
One thing to note when it cluster weapons, this applies in the same way as landmines. If the submunition is designed to be 'intelligent', and seek out targets on its own, it's legal for use (This being the case for weapons like the CBU-97 and CBU-105).
Or if it is set to detonate after fixed period after being undisturbed. The treaty about Land Mines is more about the issue of live munitions maiming or killing after the war.
@@emberfist8347 that's not an issue with the CBU-97 and 105... They're designed to detonate regardless of if they find a target or not. Though it is possible for duds to exist, as with any weapon system, it's far less likely with those two than previous generations of cluster weapon.
Sign up for a 14-day free trial and enjoy all the amazing features MyHeritage has to offer. If you decide to continue your subscription, you’ll get a 50% discount bit.ly/SimpleHistoryCore
1st
Hello
Thank you Simplehistory for this incredible to do list
how can it be a crime if there no police to enforce it ( the league of nation failed seem like nato is soon )plus if you win it doesn t apply to you ( exemple bombing civilian target during ww2 ) feel to me like the pirate code (the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules BARBOSSA
Like video
Remember everyone, it’s only a war crime if your side lost the war, if the winning side commits war crimes, it means that they “did what they had to do to win”
True
War is no sport.
To some degree, it has to be like that. When an invader employs war crimes against defender, the defender feel required to fight on the most even ground they can. If invader employs war crimes in their strategy, the defender is at an unfair advantage if they continue to follow the rules.
@@jonasgawhich is why rules of war are bogus.
There are lives on the line, and they come before any "rules" for an already evil event.
@scarletgoat173no it's false your the only one cope here
You should remember that these rules do not apply for government attacking its own civilians
That's where Constitution that needs to be followed both by government and people steps in.
Depending on what's used in Constitution. It serves both as a means to preserve safety of civilians and/or government.
@@yeboxxx_channel_2505 Yes, this piece of paper will save us because the other piece of paper won't. The Constitution, like any other set of rules, only matters if people are willing to follow it. If they aren't, it's useless.
@@SlurpeeBoy9999 ok you are right but at this point since it's true that barely anyone follows it.
Do we all just admit Demoracy is a joke if not forced by people?
I guess.
Not quite. There are certain limitations. "Grave Breaches." See Article 147 of the Geneva Convention relative to civilians.
Mandates have consequences.
Governments can’t last without the support of its people. While it would be hard to rise up against a powerful totalitarian government, human will always prevails… whether in one generation or more, we are capable of toppling them.
The “rules of war” mostly exist on paper. On a battlefield where people are doing everything they can to kill each other, it becomes more like suggestions for most and it really boils down to an individual soldier’s sense of morality.
"The code is more like what you'd call guidelines than actual rules"
As Captain Barbossa said in pirates of the Caribbean “they’re more like guidelines”.
@@Casey757 yep guidelines for all to make the call rather to follow them or disregard them.
Yep, and then you end up hanged at le hague...
Plus some of these rules ironically cause more suffering by dragging out the conflict.
Fun fact: There is no nation on Earth that is known to have followed the rules of war they agreed to, but very few nations have ever been held accountable for war crimes.
India and Pakistan pretty much sticked to rules in war not bombed Civilians. But yes Pakistan Constantly voialate cease fire agreement
Cite your fun source
Does that mean you are indian ?
How is that a fun fact?
@@manubishe * ~Points outside~ *
As a great UA-camr says, " It's not a war crime the first time."
Thank you! I was looking for this. I need to get his t shirt
The Fat Electrician! Love that guy! Warheads on foreheads!
How come it is not so the first time?
Brilliance- abhorrent actions are generally not recognised as an action of organisation. Abhorrent practices amount to war crimes by virtue of administration. There are all kinds of 'rules' that delineate 'civility' in industrialized society. It's like if we're playing tag and you get pegged in the genitals by a player trying to escape. If it happens once, it's something the other players might tell you not to do again, they might even laugh about it. If everyone's realising it works then it's "out of the realm of playing tag" in terms of realistic expectations. Humans are usually indoctrinated and act like that indoctrination is advancement of or upon a feral state.
@@dsxa918You seem fun!
Remember: it's not a war crime if you don't let anyone live who tells you otherwise
how can it be a crime if there no police to enforce it ( the league of nation failed seem like nato is soon )plus if you win it doesn t apply to you ( exemple bombing civilian target during ww2 ) feel to me like the pirate code (the code is more what you'd call "guidelines" than actual rules BARBOSSA
@jessicalacasse6205
Partisans are legal.
Change my mind.
@@jessicalacasse6205There is a police to enforce it… just as soon as they get to you. Also everyone bombed Civil targets in WW2 mostly to destroy enemy factories and military installations. Also they thought that bombing Civilians would make them less inclined to keep fighting, but that’s not how that works.
@@jessicalacasse6205why would nato decline?
Well their is the internet know
As a Norwegian-American, I find it incredible that I cannot legally perform the Blood Eagle on my enemy. It is for my Skål!
legally ;)
Well here we do it all the time son, sounds like you need to get back to ur roots
Should be a yearly family tradition
I don't know you,but you sure know how to party !
Go get fenrïr, we'll have some fun =)
I have a Norwegian Elkhound as a service dog...Best dog ever!!! ❤ 🐕
There is a hollow point 5.56 round. For those who are not aware the hollow point ammunitions do not pierce level 3 body plates or steel sheets used for indoor ranges. They are used in indoor ranges.
Funny how civilians can kill one another with hollow points, but the military can't.
It's so nice of them to make a checklist of fun activities to do in the battlefield!
Bro 💀
It's even more exciting there is no "do not try this at home"
Hi Vladimir nice anonymous account
"I got my napalm merit badge yesterday!!"
Your Canadian aren't you? They are more like Geneva suggestions.
Being a combat vet myself, I can say, any "rules of war" are purely academic.
To make the officers feel better about themselves
You certainly do have rules of war. Unfortunately anyone on the front lines will never feel it's existence.
Rules of war both established and published, and the unspoken ones.
I'll second that.
No, the US is just the empire from star wars and is cartoonishly evil
Remember: it is not a war crime if you had fun
Yeah I don't think so
It's not a war crime if you win
Brooo😂
S U P R I S E !!!
@@Lam6da98true
Watching this has made me realize how many nations violate the laws of war.
Watching these comments makes me realize how many people are completely blind to the times the rules of war are followed. We will notice one bomb on a hospital, but not the hundred hospitals who did not get bombed
Pretty much every of them... Only defeated countries get held responsable.
Israel for instance will never be held accountable for anything.
@@JourneywithSmee where? At a Neurenberg style tribunal?
Hamas will not be held accountable there either
Syria and Hezbollah will not be held accountable there either
Iran and their ultimate peace philosophy will not be held accountable either
Thank you for mentioning only Israël
More like how many times they have shown me to my face that we do it
Fun fact: The United States is not a party to The Hague Conventions, which is why the International Criminal Court cannot prosecute war criminals based in the U.S.A.; the United States legislature even passed legislation that would result in a U.S. declaration of war on The Netherlands were any such charges brought forth.
And it still took them a year to allow us to send our F-16's to Ukraine. Chickens!
Remember:
"Its never a war crime the first time"
quackbang out
Putting warheads on foreheads
I’ll be honest one my three deployments first two as a medic, I found that enemies will freely fire on medical personnel. They did in El Salvador when was a peace keeper, and in Desert Storm. My M-113A3 ambulance got shot at multiple times. Then in the next Iraq war they bomb the crap out of our CRESH. They also blasted our ambulances and medevacs.
You were in the salvadoran civil war as a medic? When did you serve friend?
@@aspecticle8905 I was there as a peace keeper in 1989. With several other US units, but mainly the 16th MASH.
Well shoot back.
@@TomFromUA-cam hard to do that when all they give you is a stupid little M-9. Pistol. They won’t let a medical track have a M-2 .50 cal as it an offensive weapon.
Not allowed
All this action are done successfully by IDF and approved by USA
"War's tragedy is that it uses man's best to do man's worst." - Harry Emerson Fosdick
ua-cam.com/users/shortsBmc9NFfhx74?si=70-x5mW3kiFU_Pvs
Remember kids: It's only a war crime for those who lost the war
True
War crimes are war crimes.
The defeater angst won't absolve you.
@@animeXcasoAbsolutely irrelevant.
Tell that to the German civilians burned alive at Dresden, German women and girls raped by Soviets in Berlin in 1945, the South Vietnamese civilians murdered by NVA forces ("But muh American war crimes muh Agent Orange reee!"), and the towns/cities burned by Union forces during the American Civil War.
@@andyfriederichsen None of those people were punished for their behavior. That's the point: if you win, you get away with it. Does that justify their actions? No, but that is also irrelevant.
So let me get this straight.
*Chemical Weapons: Banned*
*Biological Weapons: Banned*
*Nuclear Weapons: Allowed*
😎👍
😂
Nuclear weapons are de facto banned thanks to MAD.
With a nuc you have some time to get out of thr area before the fallout bio or chem you are at the mercy of the wind
A nuck normally are not use on combat bit as a prevention measure.
7:44 I like that top secret technology that is used on that bolt action rifle with the bayonet on it.
It cycles the bolt by itself, without the need for an operator. Amazing!
Lmao 😂
Hahaha you found the Easteregg
"Back in the day, when the emperor or the king waged war, they went to war too, but that's been lost in time" | Daron Malakian
They still do. If you look at royalty around the world, they typically have or are serving in the armed forces. When WW2 broke out, the (UK) King at the time wanted to go to the front lines along with then-Prime-Minister Churchill. They say they had to restrain them from grabbing a weapon and running right into the action.
I think this is the first time I’ve seen Chris Kane speaking in front of the camera.
It was a real jump scare
I think we were all shocked the first time it happened
I did not enjoy that at all.
Keep in mind this all goes out the window when "total war" is a point reached in a conflict.
Someone who has paid attention to history!
And the only time people are punished is if they lose. Types of things just make me laugh. Not from joy but exasperation.
Nope Sherman was the codifier of total war and he follows the rules to the letter.
and idelogies like communisim will play the unrestrctited warfare doctrine to try and take down anyone who threatens them and then some.
19:30 oh i am a serious war criminal in every battlefield game to date
The naval Articles of War were originally issued by the Lords Commissioners of the Admiralty in 1653 as fighting instructions after defeat at the Battle of Dungeness. Soon after the Restoration, they were converted into an Act of Parliament.
11:42 Agent 47 doesn't care about laws as long as he get's the contract done.
Rules in war is the biggest case of irony ever
Remember this Doesnt apply to isreal, or the US or any of their close allies
remember this doesnt apply hamas who actively trying to find civilians on their body cams footage, or isis or lebanon militia who hang US civilians
@@xogeneral1512find a better excuse to defend these terrorists
@@Soobing4Soobin oh u mean the jihads who bombed the hospital then blame israel? you find better excuse to blow yourself up.
19:35 dude that SPAA really took it personally
7:43 Does anyone see the Japanese rifle randomly cycling even though its on the ground and the operator of the weapon is dead?
“Friendly fire will not be tolerated.”
The problem with the laws of war is how easy it is to circumvent them. I remember footage of a journalist and his camera man as well as some people that tried to stop and help him because the gunner claimed the camera was a rocketlauncher.
I remember seeing that footage. That was the infamous “collateral murder” video that was leaked by Wikileaks. Apparently the gunner had no idea those guys were journalists and civilians and were basically on their side. He opened fire on all of them. Crazy stuff.
*"Geneva Conventions? More like Geneva Suggestion"*
- Every War Criminals
Suggestion? More like a checklist.
definitely just suggestions that shall be ignored no one is gonna brag about rules in a real firefight it only makes you a easier target on a battlefield
Wehrmacht be like
I love the hitman easter egg at 11:50
"War Crimes? More like Geneva Suggestions" Canada in the World Wars.
What did Canada do? I'm seriously asking.
@@wyattpeterson6286because Canadians in both world wars were some the best fighters in modern history, so it’s possible they committed war crimes like killing pows that surrendered
@@vaguelymodest6239 Is there a book about that?
@@wyattpeterson6286 Quite a few things in the World Wars, but most of them came from the First War. One main thing the Canadian Army was known for was their exceptional low number of POWs captured. Canada was essentially the British Empire's shock troops when it came to trench warfare and especially at raiding trenches. They were known to take very few if any prisoners during the raids and quite a few instances of mutilating the bodies of the dead Germans. There were also several instances of them executing German soldiers after the soldiers surrendered to them.
Another instance was around Christmas the Canadians threw cans of tin meat to the German trenches for a few days and after the Germans got use to it and didn't duck for cover they threw grenades at them instead. While around the same time in some other German/Canadian trenches the Germans tried to get another Christmas Truce between the two sides. After exchanging Christmas songs the Germans stood up out of the trenches and the Canadians shot them all down.
There's a lot more different instances of Canadian war crimes but the main ones are of their treatment of captured, or lack of captured, German POWs.
ANd the USA
Another thing illegal in war: Dropping a JDAM on a hospital.
Not illegal at all, nor did it happen
@@reptiles3244Keep telling yourself that
Guess it was a good thing we haven't declared was since 1941.
I would also like to point out that after these rules were established, they have been abused and used as methods of shielding by our enemies. Such as not wearing uniforms to appear as a civilain... or using civilian structures and densely populated areas as strongholds. Rarely are these codes of conduct extended to us by our enemies.
And the law dictates that those rules are then null and void. It only applies when the other side is also following it.
@@emberfist8347 yeah basically the rules are writen in a way to basically cover the fact that there are those who will try and use the rules of war against one side or another for propaganda reasons. in such case of this happening then it's fair game for the other side to prosecute any of those enemies taken alive for those crimes.
I know and I would wager that those who wrote the rules did cover that angle of non state actors trying to weaponize the rules of war against people to allow crimes to happen and bate people in to a propaganda trap. the signers of such must have to take that in to account and should have fail safes in place to punish those who play that tactic.
@@TheManofthecross Well if they don't make it a rule ASAP!!!!
hamas broke all rules, now will be wiped out.. including civilians...
Normally Medics and Corpsmen carried M1 Carbines or 1911s as back up guns. This was due to the fact in the Pacific theatre Japanese soldiers often disregarded the rules of engagement in combat
and used the red cross as a meat shield to move troops against china and viewed medics as easy kills etc. aka turn the rules of war against your enemies to weaken them by morals etc.
Jap"anes" you act like they're human.
17:32 "Any weapon that is intended to cause permanent paralysis or injury is banned from warfare." Wouldn't that eliminate all but non-lethal weapons?
No because a lethal weapon is design to kill not permanently paralyze someone.
@@emberfist8347can you move If dead?
that is the weirdest one you cant killing people is fine, but leaving them alive but with a lasting injury isnt? I think most people would rather be alive and disabled than just dead
There is a photograph somewhere of an exchange of fire between a plane and someone in a parachute. The plane started firing at enemy pilots who bailed out after losing a dogfight. One of these pilots hanging from a parachute pulled out his pistol and killed the threat
As far as I know, there's only one recorded case fitting that description. I don't recall all the details, but I believe the paratrooper was a British airman in one of the World Wars (WWI, I think).
“If your actions do not inspire fear and terror in the hearts of your adversary, then you have no business waging war.” Johnathan Irons
Now I gotta replay that Game and Ponder why we have to only use ballistic weaponry all because someone made a No cheating in War Rule named after the Capital of Switzerland and a location in the Netherlands.
"Like I said. Kids are cruel, Jack. And I'm very in touch with my inner child."
-Sundowner
@@BaxterAndLunala
"Making the mother of all omelets here Jack. Can't fret about every egg."
- Sun Tzu, probably
Finally you say something relatable to the video. There's hope!
@@kaibean8046 That's Confucius lol
"Rules are for children. This is war, and in war the only crime is to lose." -- Joe Abercrombie
He was right
Does that include the raping and torturing of women and children that the Japanese did in WW2?
@@allanshpeley4284 even is monstruous, yes, the only thing that keep from doing it is morality
@@allanshpeley4284what war crimes did the japanese NOT do ?
@@turbomaster7511 Drop atomic bombs on civilians.
18:06 Sahir, That is not a war crime, just a happy accident :)
*proceeds to blow up"
Miles O'Brien : There are rules, even in a war.
Garak : Correction Chief, humans have rules in war. Rules that tend to make victory a little harder to achieve, in my opinion.
Clergyman: BRING OUT THE HOLY HAND GRENADE!
Buffy reference?
The Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch!😂
On Worms there was Holy grenade or bomb. Really loved to use it!
I love that at 7:44 the Arisaka reloads itself on the ground
good eye
Indeed, good eye.
thank you@@Scootero
thank you @@TiocfaidhArLa34
Certainly one of the more Informative and Educational videos you have done. I have always wondered about the "Rules of War". Most people know all about the FIRST category, but the rest i bet almost no one knows less you have been in the military. Most of this stuff sounds like it would be considered "inhuman" or "unthinkable" by most people.
So thanks for informing us.
8:00 Pretending to be wounded, then suicide bombing to kill the enemy medic? That's the funniest war crime I have ever seen! Very creative!
There's a video of a Russian doing almost exactly that in Ukraine.
Love the content been watching since 2021 keep it coming
These rules primarily serve two purposes:
For winning nations to further punish and thus neuter those they defeat
For strong nations to eliminate the only real recourse lesser nations have, so that they either have to fight with hand tied behind their back or provide excuse for escalation of force.
Underrated comment fr
Just for anyone who is curious of the parachuting person, do not confuse the protections granted to aircrews/pilots to be the same for paratroopers.
If a pilot or airplane crew are shot down over enemy lines and they are parachuting down, they would technically be protected since their aircraft serves in place of what would be a soldiers "Rifle" Once the aircraft is shot down, the pilots lost their ability to threaten enemy fortifications or incoming enemy planes. (Unless of course they use their service weapons to shoot at ground targets as mentioned in the video, then they would ultimately revoke their protections.)
However, paratroopers do not qualify for this protection since they are being dropped down with full kit and gear with the intent of being on a mission to cause damage to the enemy.
Having the rules of war being taught to you by Metal Gear's Big Boss really is something 👌
The narrator is not David Hayter, dude. What are you smoking?
14:10 doesn't matter then if a nuclear weapon is used tactical, strategical, or conventional. Because at that point war crimes don't matter, because we have bigger issues to worry about.
Indeed, TACTICAL NUKES INCOMING!
5:39
The Dead Japanese soldier is cycling his arisaka lol
As someone who has been looking into particularly gruesome battles lately, some of these "laws" seem to be broken more often than not!
Weird way of counting you have. For every hospital bombed, there are hundreds untouched
My dad told me that you don't shoot medics because they are bound by oath to help you as well.
00:25 Dude even paused for a second before he shot him... Evil
Countries when they're in war: "The rules are more of a guideline"
When it's total War, the Geneva convention seems more of a geneva Suggestion.
Nope. William T. Sherman did total war and didn’t commit any violations of either treaty.
Hamas and Israel:
We are gonna pretend like we don’t know such things, right guys?
But what about those volksturm units are they still classified as a non combatants when they surrender or will they be thrown in the slammer and put on trial like the others
Surrender? They were resisting and were shot !
If they took arms then they will be treated as such
@@NP3GA what if they were in a resistance
@@ryleeculla5570 same thing, if you try fight expect to be treated as soldier
No one is truly neutral in a war. Because war polarizes people. It has to do so.
Remember kids, war is an atrocity that civilians suffer.
Sadly, because of why wars tend to be fought nowadays, only one side at the most is going to even try to respect the rules of war. And modern history has shown that the best players only used the rules of war as a suggestion half the time.
and only weaponize it against there enemies when it is convenit politically etc. otherwise it is ignored.
And we see these rules being ignored even today
That poor green vest dude got subjected to every possible war crime
It makes my blood boil that there are countries in the world see the Geneva Convention as a checklist!
Whataboutist brigade in 3... 2... 1...
Nobody cares, everyone does it. War is nasty by virtue, I’m European and I can tell you, id still much rather have America be the world power than Russia or China.
They ALL committed heinous war crimes, you just gotta chose the least evil, you‘ll never be able to eliminate the brutality or control what the people in power do and its beyond delusional to think otherwise.
Instead of writing a UA-cam comment that does exactly NOTHING, donate some money or go volunteer in NGO‘s
Geneva heard of it
I agree, shame most countries don't see the Geneva convention as a checklist
They are more like “guidelines” than actual rules 😂
The last survivor always tells the truth. What I mean by this is that is there is no evidence then it does not matter what you've done. History and actions are easily hidden and it's safe to assume every country has committed war crimes in the past few decades and gotten away with it
It's safe to assume most people have no idea how many countries have not been at war for the past few decades
"According to the Hague and Geneva Conventions, Nations are not allowed to attack civilian Infrastructures, public services, historical cultural monuments, religious buildings, and agricultural sectors."
Germany and Japan in WW2: 💀💀💀😈😈😈
Serbia in 1989 to 2005: 💀💀💀😈😈😈
Russia from 2022 up to this day: 💀💀💀😈😈😈
The MG-42 in that thumbnail is literally a 2D version of the MG-42 from Call of Duty World at War. Same exact first person model.
In ww1 the german complained about the use of shotguns because they said it was unfair and caused more lifes
Yea tgey werent real fond of trench clearers
Well Germany had no legs to stand on. Gas attacks for one thing and bombing London. There was and still is no rule against using shotguns. But the Germans saw it as turning war into hunting and therefore barbaric.
@emberfist8347 well the Germans weren't the first to use gas but I'll give you the bombing London.
04:04 kinda hits different given recent news.
It’s not a war crime if it brought you peace.
What a dumb take
...like?
It's not rape if you marry them afterwards
@@GHOST_CROATIA Bruh, it was a joke. As a Croat, you should understand this.
@@capncake8837 It definitelly didnt sound like a joke. If it really was then nvm.
7:44 That rifle though.
In peace,it's Geneva convention,in war it's Geneva suggestion. In some cases,Geneva convention turns into "To do" list
"There's no mercy in war. It's a collision of powers." - Solo Wing Pixy
17:31 Well, that kind of explains why Flashbangs cause temporary blindness rather than permanent blindness.
13:18 Out of Context this is just hilarious. 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
The only rules of war are that if you win, the other side is the one said to have broken the rules….
Its the same the japanese occupation of China than the allies occupation of Germany. Exactly the same.
@@WissHH-No it isn’t. Japan for one thing never occupied all of China.
@@emberfist8347 so?
@@WissHH- You claim both occupations are exactly the same but I proved they weren't.
Rules of war: exist
Russia: hold my gulag
I find it curious that something non-lethal and with no lasting effects like tear gas is banned. The only reason I can see is to prevent the party it is being used against jumping to the conclusion it is a lethal gas attack and responding with an illegal act (such as actual poison gas or nerve agent).
Actually tear/CS gas is classified as a incapacitating agent, thus the use of the chemical could be used to incapacitate combatants so they are easier to terminate.
That seems to make sense. But it's still stupid. Because if the gas I hit you with only irritated your eyes and respiratory system why would you think I used chlorine or mustard gas?
@aaronmyers1982 Agreed, any modern military has specialised portable chemical spectrometers which are used to detect and analyse chemical weapons.
It still counts as a chemical weapons because that is what it is.
or the case of a mixup of loading up the gas shells and use the lethal types instead of the non lethal types.
Enemy soldiers: Kicks down door of suspected military safehouse
Civilian inside: Shut up I'm trying to crank 90's in fortnite
An old man came to me to make his last will. He proudly showed me a pocket watch he stole at gunpoint from a German POW in Europe during WWII. He instructed me to leave the watch to one of his children. Apparently it's a war crime to steal personal property from a captured combatant.
So we can’t commit war crimes in games too?
Yeah I get burned alive by a flame thrower as a medic is Battlefield 1
15:31 Wait, is this a Plague Inc reference? Starting in Saudi Arabia is the best idea in the game but y'know
“If you win who will punish you” Me just this second
In war all these rules mean nothing. Nobody follows these rules.
The Hitman Reference in the Intro 😂
If police are defending their city in war alongside soldiers in their police uniforms, then are they lawful combatants?
Then they are lawful targets. In peacetime, police are criminal targets. 🐷🔫😄
I would say yes. Combatants include militia groups who hanged a clear insignia. A police badge meets those requirements.
Germans during WW1 against Russians: Let’s throw chlorine gas to the defenders!
Russians while still suffering from chlorine gas: Charge!!!
They gassed themselves a couple of times also when the wind changed directions on them.
@@skullcrusher9445And that is part of why gas is banned but not nukes. You can control a nuke much better and prevent it from doing collateral damage to your own side or civilians compared to a chemical weapon.
@@emberfist8347 mate, its war. Nothing is actually banned.
@@skullcrusher9445 No it is. The Geneva Convention exists.
@@emberfist8347 No it's the Geneva CHECKLIST
Meanwhile Israel "lets see how many of these we can get away with"
I’m surprised to hear that these rules actually had a section on the lasers! Thanks for filling me in.
He didn't mention that Russia is also using cluster munitions
Ukraine is using chemical weapons equally.
Your point?
@@rogerhack3750 what type of chemical weapons?
Chlorine Gas
Mustard Gas
Or what?
So does Ukraine with every drone bomb they dropped since start of war . so did USA in Iraq and Afghanistan against civilian targets. so does Israhell on daily basis against civilian population, not to mention regular use of chemical weapons by Israhell. So does Saudis in their illegal war against Yemen.
Your point being?
it is only a war crime if you lose
Israel : Hold my phosphorus bombs...
The Geneva Suggestion 💀
“There are no such thing rules in war there is only death and destruction within itself even when evil does.”
Remember its not a Warcrime if 1 you win and b you where ordered to do so.
The thing about wars is that they are rarely 'to the bitter end'. Wars are often to serve a political purpose, and the fighting only goes as long as that purpose is fulfilled. Rules of war are to prevent wars from turning into fights of attrition and annihilation, aka to prevent wars from going too far past what they're meant for.
One thing to note when it cluster weapons, this applies in the same way as landmines. If the submunition is designed to be 'intelligent', and seek out targets on its own, it's legal for use (This being the case for weapons like the CBU-97 and CBU-105).
Or if it is set to detonate after fixed period after being undisturbed. The treaty about Land Mines is more about the issue of live munitions maiming or killing after the war.
@@emberfist8347 that's not an issue with the CBU-97 and 105... They're designed to detonate regardless of if they find a target or not. Though it is possible for duds to exist, as with any weapon system, it's far less likely with those two than previous generations of cluster weapon.
@@Tank50us make sense the land mine treaty is one of the only ones the US signed.