War is brutal - but even amid the chaos,
soldiers have to follow rules. Whether they make sense or not.
Here are some of the strangest things that are banned in war and the military.
Soldiers are allowed to do anything that is militarily necessary to win in combat - but
they’re not allowed to be cruel for no reason. This applies to certain deadly weapons, but it
also applies to the little things. The Geneva Convention, which regulates the laws of war,
prohibits filing down your bullets to make them likely to expand on contact. The only purpose of
this is to make them harder to remove, similar to hollow-point bullets. There’s no military
benefit to making more enemy soldiers die on the operating table, so the Hague says that’s a no-no.
War might seem like a time for no mercy - but there are limits.
You’ve probably seen it in the movies - the army moves in, and the ruthless commander barks out
“No quarter given!”. This means that the army goes wild, killing any enemy soldiers they come
across - even slaughtering anyone who tries to surrender. This was common in past wars,
but now is strictly against the law. Quartering refers to taking prisoners of war, who are
required to be treated humanely. Any military official who tortures or kills prisoners of war
will be subject to war crimes proceedings, as many Axis leaders found out after World War II.
But what many people don’t know is that even saying “No Quarter Given” breaks the law,
because if a commander says it, his troops will likely consider it an order.
Shockingly, in some cases civilians are allowed to do more than military personnel.
Tear gas, it’s a common way to control chaotic crowds, but this is controversial in its own
right. Tear gas is extremely painful, can cause stampedes and tramplings,
and has caused accidental fatalities due to bad reactions. But it’s legal as an alternative to
deadly force in most circumstances - so why is it banned in war? Surely bullets aren’t a more
humane alternative? The difference is that in war, it’s assumed that deadly force will be used,
and firing on an incapacitated soldier is a war crime. So using tear gas in combat
is likely to only serve the purpose of confusing the enemy soldier and making them easier to hit.
But weapons aren’t the only thing that hurts. Words hurt too!
The treatment of prisoners of war is strictly regulated. Physically harming them or torturing
them is a war crime. They have to be given access to medical attention and have their basic rights
respected. And you’d better not say anything mean to them. Wait, what? It might seem silly at first,
but there’s a strict ban on insulting prisoners of war - for a good reason.
Humane treatment means no physical abuse, but it also protects them from intimidation
and verbal assault. What does that mean? Well, that’s up for debate - but the Geneva Convention
is pretty broad and it’s believed that any sort of insults or threats violate the law.
And it’s not just the people you have to be careful about.
Maybe your grandpa showed you a gold ring from his time in the war. He bragged that he took
it off some Nazi soldier after he captured him. A memory of heroic service - or grandpa admitting to
a serious crime? Unfortunately, it’s probably the latter - by taking anything off the battlefield
you’d be partaking in the crime of pillaging. This applies to both civilians and enemy combatants,
and anything taken from the battlefield must be inventoried and cleared by the military
leadership. However, this law wasn’t always very well-enforced, especially in large wars. So the
odds are no one’s knocking down Grandpa’s door at the old folks’ home to take that ring back.
But certain areas of the battlefield are more protected than others.
It might be tempting to strike a killing blow against the enemy forces by starving
them of the things every human being needs - food and water. Throughout history, burning farms and
damaging or blocking the drinking supply was a common ruthless tactic of armies, but the Geneva
Convention put an end to that practice. While there is an exception for military necessity,
such as damage done in the middle of a firefight on farmland, intentionally damaging food or water
supplies is considered a war crime. This is largely because the tactic would undoubtedly
cause a larger impact - starving countless civilians in the area who rely on the supplies.
And sometimes, even fashion can be a crime.
No, this isn’t about wearing white after Labor Day. But why is it a violation of the Geneva
Convention to wear light blue headgear on a combat uniform? This is a new law,
following the foundation of the United Nations and their Peacekeeper force. That’s because the
UN got there first with a specific shade of blue, and they don’t want any confusion. If
an army wearing similar headgear enters the fray and is mistaken for UN peacekeepers,
the enemy forces might surrender and allow the duplicitous army to massacre
them. And then, actual peacekeepers might be vulnerable to reprisal attacks.
And it’s not the only attire that’s protected - this next one applies to vehicles.
The red cross means one thing on the battlefield - help is coming. The international peacekeeping
and medical aid group is commonly seen on battlefields and in combat zones helping the
wounded and aiding in evacuations. That’s why the Geneva Convention strictly prohibits combat
vehicles from putting any sort of red cross on their exterior - as well as the symbols
of the Red Cross’ sister organizations, the Red Crescent and the Red Shield of David. Placing
one on a combat vehicle is considered illegal deception and a breach of the laws of war.
Medics as a whole get special protection.
Red Cross medical professionals are among the most protected people in combat,
because all combatants benefit from having medical help available to them.
Not only is harming a medic a war crime, but it’s illegal to interfere with them in any way.
This even includes denying them access to a location. In the past, medical aid workers could
come into an area - but the army often wouldn’t let them leave to ensure they were the only ones
who would benefit. The Geneva Convention defines interfering with medics loosely,
but it’s generally believed to mean anything more than brief security checks is off-limits.
The armies aren’t the only side being regulated though as medics are forbidden
to carry weapons in combat zones if they want to maintain non-combatant status.
And they’re not the only people protected by the Geneva Convention.
Being a journalist covering a war takes some real courage. After all, bullets and bombs don’t
differentiate if you’re in their way, and you don’t get those iconic shots of the war by staying
in a foxhole. The world believes that honest coverage of the horrors of war is important, and
so journalists have many regulations protecting them. Like medics, they’re not allowed to carry
weapons, but the unit they’re stationed with is required to protect them by any means necessary.
Because they choose to put their lives on the line to bring back the truth, their unit
does the same to ensure they get back home. And deliberately targeting journalists is a war crime.
But one person on the battlefield is considered even more sacred.
They say there are no atheists in foxholes. Whether that’s true or not,
countless soldiers have found comfort in the words of the military chaplain. Chaplains are assigned
to uphold the moral and religious health of their unit, but like medics, they are only allowed to
enter combat to provide medical or spiritual aid. It’s a terrifying and dangerous job,
undertaken by men of faith - and over four hundred US chaplains have died in combat. But eight have
also won the Medal of Honor - which is all the more impressive given that they’re not allowed
to pick up a weapon without violating their role and surrendering their non-combatant status.
But all civilians have some rights on the battlefield.
There are few things scarier than being caught in the middle of a war zone. With armies on both
sides, civilians often have few options - which is why international law requires armies to
provide safe passage for civilians. Not only is it banned to fire on unarmed civilians or block them
from fleeing, but the laws indicate the armies should provide advance warning before attacks
and allow safe corridors for civilian passage. Armies that essentially treat
the civilian population in the area as hostages may face sanctions after the shooting stops.
And certain buildings are off-limits as well.
Armies are frequently targeting the infrastructure of their enemy, which can mean some massive
explosions as buildings are taken down. To avoid excess civilian casualties, armies are
required to provide ample warning to civilians to evacuate and they’re also not supposed to target
buildings that are there for just civilian purposes. These include schools, hospitals,
and media sites. However, armies often find ways around this law - and multiple states have gotten
into controversy when fighting guerilla armies that they claim hide out in civilian buildings.
These laws apply to every army around the world - but there
are some odd rules that apply to the US military as well.
What happens in the bedroom, stays in the bedroom - right? Not in the military. For civilians,
adultery is a betrayal that can end a marriage - as well as result in a lamp thrown at your head
from an angry wife. But in the military, it’s a crime against the Uniform Code of Military
Justice. Not only can it get you thrown out of the military with a dishonorable discharge,
but it can result in loss of pay and even imprisonment for up to a year.
Why does the military crack down so hard on dishonorable spouses?
It’s not just morality - commanders also worry that a cheating spouse trying to cover it up
could be vulnerable to blackmail from enemy spies looking for intelligence on the unit.
Sometimes, it seems like the military just doesn’t want you to have a good time.
Okay, so we all know we’re not supposed to treat prisoners of war badly. They’re soldiers too,
and entitled to their rights. But what about treating them too well? Surprisingly,
a good number of soldiers have gotten into trouble for fraternizing with prisoners when one element
was involved - alcohol. This can result in up to three months’ imprisonment and loss of pay,
and it’s not hard to see why. If a soldier gives a prisoner liquor and they drink together, lips
start getting loose and this could jeopardize base security. So keep those beers locked up, private!
And no matter how mad you get while drinking, don’t do this.
Surely nothing a former US Vice President did could get a soldier into trouble, right?
Well, not if that Vice President is Aaron Burr, whose duel against Alexander Hamilton
is remembered to this day. The military has strict regulations against dueling,
which they define as challenging someone to combat or participating in a challenge.
This applies whether the duel in question involves guns, blades, or even just fists.
Which means that settling things by fighting it out behind the dumpster like you did in elementary
school will mean more than detention. It could mean confinement for a year,
loss of pay, and a dishonorable discharge - assuming no one dies in the duel, of course.
This next one might be a surprise - especially to Navy members.
War is hell, right? It’s enough to make you cuss like a sailor. But better be careful - you don’t
want to do it while the Admiral is watching. The military code of justice actually prohibits
indecent language, which it defines as anything grossly offensive to modesty,
decency, or propriety. This one is probably not enforced all the time - after all,
who has time for a court-martial over bad language in the middle of a war zone?
But someone who curses out a superior officer could likely find themselves up on charges,
and there exist very harsh penalties for breaking this rule - including up to two
years imprisonment - for any soldier who uses indecent language in front of a child.
This one might seem silly - but it could be costly.
It’s been a long day on a Navy warship, and the sun is beating down hard. The blue water
below looks awfully enticing, and you decide to take a dip. What’s the worst that could happen?
The answer is, confinement of up to six months, loss of pay and benefits,
and a bad-conduct discharge. Jumping off a vessel into the water is strictly prohibited,
and this is mostly a safety measure. After all, no one knows what’s lurking in the water below,
and the brass wants to minimize accidental deaths and injuries. Also, if someone jumps off a moving
vessel and the ship has to turn back to pick them up, it could be costly in time and money.
And if you were picked last in gym class, you might want to think twice about signing up.
No one likes those long, brutal marches in full gear, and it’s easy to fall behind or
get lost - especially in the jungle or woods. But try your best to keep up - straggling on
a march can actually be an offense that carries confinement of up to three months and forfeiture
of pay for the same period. This isn’t likely to be levied against someone who’s exhausted,
as they’re usually just prodded to keep up - loudly. But the law is on
the book to deter people from getting lost and requiring manhunts to find them - or worse,
from lagging behind the crowd and using the opportunity to go AWOL.
If you join the military, you’d better be ready to follow the rules.
There are a lot of regulations enforced by the brass, and while violating these won’t likely
get you arrested or jailed, you’re likely to face administrative discipline like being
confined to your base, losing privileges, or being ordered to do extra exercises. So, many
push-ups. And some of these can be pretty silly. For instance, if you’re a lower-ranking soldier,
don’t even think about walking and holding a cell phone at the same time.
Why? It’s not because the brass is worried about you keeping your wits about you while crossing the
street - it’s because the troops need to be able to salute their officers at a moment’s notice.
US soldiers need to keep their wits about them - even about where they’re walking.
Walking on someone else’s grass is usually considered rude.
You might have even had a grumpy neighbor yell at you when you took a shortcut. But keeping off
the grass is never more important than when you’re in the military. On military bases,
everything is supposed to be in order, and that includes the greenery. So even mussing up the
grass with your shoes can get you in serious trouble with a mercurial commanding officer.
But there’s one circumstance where you can walk on the grass with no trouble - when you’re mowing it.
Your comfort is probably not the military’s top priority in a lot of situations.
Soldiers should probably get used to standing in formation. Marches are a regular part of training,
and soldiers are usually expected to stand at attention when a high-ranking officer comes
onto the scene - whether it’s freezing cold or burning hot that day. But don’t count on
being able to cover up. Most military commanders enforce the rules against
non-regulation wear when standing in formation - and that includes sunglasses during the summer,
or earmuffs and gloves during the winter. While some commanders might take mercy during brutal
weather, there’s always the fear of violating protocol - after all, they have a boss too.
Sometimes, it’s not about what you do - it’s about what you use.
Heading back to the world of international law, the weapons of war have changed a lot
from past wars. Soldiers now have many new options for fighting - and with that,
the Geneva Convention has outlawed many past weapons
deemed inhumane. Some were found to have no strategic purpose besides causing pain.
Others were deemed deceptive and against the spirit of combat. And others were just plain
weird. These are some of the strange weapons that have been thrown on the dustbin of combat history.
Much like hollow-point bullets, which expand and become harder to take out, the world is
cracking down on the use of bullets designed to impair medical help. One of those banned types
is bullets that leave non-detectible fragments - any item that can’t be found using x-rays. This
includes plastic or fiberglass weapons that a surgeon would have to dig around looking for
manually. Military surgeons often work fast and try to save many lives in a short period of time,
and trying to save one person with non-detectible fragments in their body could doom several others.
This one isn’t entirely banned - but don’t even think of trying to use it as a weapon.
Is there any more powerful natural weapon of destruction than fire?
A single spark can create a wildfire that destroys an entire ecosystem. So it’s no
surprise that flamethrowers are heavily regulated in combat. These gas-powered fire shooters can be
an invaluable tool for clearing foliage blocking a military’s advance, but the Convention on Certain
Conventional Weapons makes it illegal to use them as weapons. While it may make for a great movie
visual to turn a flamethrower on enemy forces, in reality it just makes you a war criminal.
It’s not the only weapon of fire banned.
It was one of the most shocking moments in World War 2 - the only
successful attack on the US mainland came not from an army or a bomber,
but from a fleet of balloons carrying incendiary bombs. After a family in Oregon was killed,
the government covered it up and kept an eye on the sky. But surprisingly,
these fire balloons weren’t banned after the Second World War - they were already crimes
against humanity since the 1898 convention. While they’re not particularly deadly weapons, their
deceptive nature and their likelihood of targeting civilians makes their use unacceptable in war.
This next weapon is largely banned for civilians AND military use.
Lasers. Sure, in the movies they’re usually used to terrorize James Bond, but they’re no
less dangerous in real life. There have been close calls when high-powered laser pointers
were used to blind airline pilots, putting entire planes in jeopardy. But the military gets a little
more leeway when it comes to these powerful light beams. Lasers are allowed in combat, but only if
they’re only capable of causing temporary eye impairment in the enemy. Any lasers that can
permanently blind someone are seen as weapons designed to maim and are strictly prohibited.
And if you’re thinking of upgrading your ammo…don’t.
Poisoned bullets may sound like something out of a spy thriller, but it’s actually a ruthless
tactic dating back thousands of years. One of the very first war conventions ever signed was between
the Holy Roman Empire and France, and it involved not using poisoned bullets in their weapons. The
method of poisoning then was rather primitive - it included storing ammo in dead bodies to
infect them with deadly germs before firing it - but now it’s possible to infuse bullets
with deadly synthetic toxins. Possible, but highly forbidden, because the Geneva Convention
has banned the use of poisoned ammo and it’s largely become the domain of terror groups only.
Sometimes, a treaty is maintained because both sides fear the alternative.
There are few things scarier than an outbreak of a deadly disease - as the world knows full well.
But the use of biological weapons has been a dirty secret of warfare going back millennia. Famously,
soldiers in the United States gave Natives blankets that were infected with Smallpox.
But the ruthless tactic has since been banned by international law,
and it’s one of the most abided-by treaties in the world. There’s a simple reason for that.
Diseases do not obey borders or differentiate between armies. That means that if a plague gets
unleashed upon one army, it likely won’t be long before it infects the people who sent it as well.
People would like this weapon to be gone as a whole, but they’re focusing on one kind.
The campaign to outlaw land mines has gained a lot of steam, but the Ottawa treaty still
has some big obstacles in its path. Namely, none of Russia, China, or the United States
has signed it. That means large parts of the world are still dotted with the explosive devices,
but the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons has made a dent in one area. The meeting agreed
to outlaw the use of plastic land mines and others with no metal parts. These devices can’t
be detected with x-rays, and as such are very difficult to clear even after the war is over.
The world is very careful to avoid any weapons that could render it uninhabitable.
Many people would love to get rid of nuclear weapons all together. After all,
there’s something creepy about knowing that you’re one button-push away from total annihilation.
But while nuclear nations are not ready to give up their big guns,
there are laws against a certain kind of nuclear weapon - the dirty bomb.
This is a conventional bomb that’s loaded with nuclear material. While it won’t cause
a mushroom cloud or turn a city to ash, it’s possible one of these bombs could render a whole
city uninhabitable for decades due to nuclear fallout, much like what happened in Chernobyl.
But some banned items in war are a little more bizarre.
Biological warfare is a large category, usually encompassing the use of natural toxins or viruses
to poison the enemy. But it has a sub-category that will give many people the willies -
entomological warfare. This is the use of insects to attack the enemy, often by unleashing parasitic
insects to harm crops. While multiple parties have done research into this tactic, it’s only
been unleashed a few times - most famously by Japan against China in World War II. Japan’s
military used plague-infected flies and fleas to spread disease among the Chinese population,
causing a massive pandemic that killed hundreds of thousands. Those who campaigned against this type
of warfare celebrated when the tactic was banned by the Biological and Toxic Weapons Convention
of 1972, and there is no signs of it coming back in the form of trained attack wasps - yet.
This one might sound like a Looney Tunes gag - but that doesn’t make it less deadly.
One of the biggest dangers of warfare is when the environment itself turns against you.
A soldier is walking through the jungle when the ground collapses under him,
sucking him into a pit below. But this isn’t a freak sinkhole - it’s a spike pit,
a dug hole then filled with sharpened bamboo spikes designed to wound or kill the unfortunate
soldier. While this was a primitive technique dating back thousands of years
as it was ideal for stopping mounted soldiers in their tracks, it didn’t stay in the past - these
deathtraps were being used as late as the Vietnam War. Some armies even used poison
or animal feces on the spikes to ensure that if someone survived the spikes, they weren’t
likely to stay alive for long. The horrible injuries caused by these traps were enough to
convince the Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons to ban these traps for good in 1979.